Quote
Originally posted by: pjstrohNone of what DonDiego mentions is unconstitutional.
Just so. That is DonDiego's point.
But some of it may be illegal. Apparently the campus police have determined the feces-in-the-bathroom-incident to be "tampering", . . . a lesser charge than "vandalism", because nothing was actually damaged. DonDiego supposes whatever "message" was intended by the fecal-swastika is not illegal, unless a case for a "clear threat" can be made.
DonDiego recommends determining who is guilty and applying whatever punishment is legal.
And as far as DonDiego can determine University Conduct Codes may permit expelling a student for engaging in such activities.
DonDiego has no objection to enforcement of such codes.
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
But if you believe campus authorities and administration officials should turn a blind eye to a climate of racial slurs and swastika art projects then I truly feel sorry for you.
DonDiego does not believe that; in fact pjstroh and DonDiego are in agreement.
The Administration should discourage discrimination, and intimidation,and even racial slurs to the extent permissible by Law. DonDiego encourages counseling and identifying/shaming the perpetrators.
And as far as DonDiego can determine University Conduct Codes may permit expelling a student for engaging in such activities.
DonDiego has no objection to enforcement of such codes.
Nonetheless, racial slurs are not illegal.
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
You wont find many corporations in America that protect that form of free speech, either. but I invite any of our "free speech" patriots to throw out some slurs at their next department meeting. I'm sure DonDiego and friends will give you some much needed moral support after your employer hands you a pink slip.
See DonDiego's response to "campus authorities and administration turning a blind eye", immediately above.
As far as DonDiego can determine Corporate Conduct Codes may permit expelling an employee for engaging in such activities.
DonDiego has no objection to enforcement of such codes.
DonDiego would provide no moral support condoning such behavior.
Nonetheless, racial slurs are not illegal.
Here's the bottom line regarding criminality in such matters:
A "hate crime" ot "bias-motivated crime" may be committed when hate or bias contribute to violation of a Law. However, a Law which criminalizes any thought or speech, no matter how offensive or hateful, is a violation of the First Amendment.
Ref: Wisconsin v. Mitchell
DonDiego recalls a childhood comeback to those who would insult/mock/belittle him: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me." The First Amendment recognizes this also.
