The Schizophrenic SCOTUS.

[Bonestorm]

Here's Nigel's philosophy. It is ok for Gay and lesbian groups to discriminate against homophobes, but not ok for Christians to keep non-believers out of their groups. You can force ideology on one group but not the other. Very democratic of you.

No one is forcing ideology on anyone. If you want to be a school sanctioned group, you have to follow the non-discrimination policy. I really don't get what all the trouble is, let alone the silly ad hom bullshit.

It wouldn't be OK for gay and lesbian groups to discriminate against straight people because they're straight. It wouldn't be OK for atheist groups to keep out believers because of their religion. If you want to have a homophobe group you can go fucking nuts and do whatever the fuck you want, but you have no right to school funding of your activities.

 

[Timshel]

Careful, String. You're libel to be labeled a liberal authoritarian.

It would be much easier if UC Hastings was private. It still enjoys some level of autonomy, though, in pursuit of it's educational interest. There is no reason that Hastings, as a public institution, has less 1st amendment rights than a student group seeking public funds and support. That is, Hastings has as much right to choose whom they associate with as any student group. Why should CLS's right to choose its members trump Hastings right to choose the members of its RSO? It's just two groups arguing over the use of state funds and facilities.

Hastings policy is reasonable, but I am not sure they have applied it consistently.

CLS has not made the case that open membership would have any significant impact on its speech. I really don't think it is likely that they will experience a hostile takeover from other students with the same right to free speech. But if they did, what's really to stop them from forming a new group?

Also, I don't see how exclusion from the RSO program represents any real limit on CLS's speech rights.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Wow. That's the stupidest shit I've read all week. And I've read a lot of stupid shit so far this week.

and as usual.....you spout your lame opinions with no discussion....

how many times have religious folk been called homophobes? you're playing stupid here and winning nigel. if you want me to say you're awesome at being stupid....just say so, don't beat around the bush.

 

[evince]

And you lie

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Here's Nigel's philosophy. It is ok for Gay and lesbian groups to discriminate against homophobes, but not ok for Christians to keep non-believers out of their groups. You can force ideology on one group but not the other. Very democratic of you.

in all (gag) fairness to (gag) nigel....

the point is...it is not just about recognition, the issue is funding...funding and recognition are one and the same here. if they want to exclude others, then why is it they should expect funding from an institution that wants to not exclude others?

would you support a white KKK club wanting funding? granted, the so called club was open to "all"....however, you had to "repent" of your gayness or whatever.....would you support a white club that was open to all, but, you had to repent your blackness, yellowness or whatever.....?

why should the university have to FUND them, thereby recognize them? why not form on their own?

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

The four who voted against should be executed for violating their oaths of office.