<p>
</p>
<p>If the protests that happened on Tuesday night aren’t an example of intolerance, I don’t know what is. Racism isn’t a problem here, but as Tuesday night demonstrated, we still have work to do when it comes to tolerance.</p>
<p>Coolbreeze, are you and “Coolbrezze” actually the same person? If not, the two names are quite a coincidence…</p>
<p>Cuse, the point was that hopeful students won’t encounter a lot of RACIAL intolerance…not intolerance of another political party’s ideals.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know about you, but I’m opposed to pretty much every kind of intolerance…</p>
<p>Yeah…YEAH, I GET YOUR POINT. THE OTHER POINT WAS THIS: SOME STUDENTS MAY NOT BE DETERRED NOW THAT THEY KNOW THAT UNC IS NOT A RACIST SCHOOL. </p>
<p>That was the original point I think Leah was trying to make…not that the protesters were not wrong.</p>
<p>I guess. I don’t know what kind of people would be excited that political intolerance exists even where racism doesn’t, but to each his own…</p>
<p>Well, you know, bacon doesn’t fry in the kitchen.</p>
<p>I’m not sure that I understand the analogy…I’ve never heard that saying before.</p>
<p>lol (10char)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is a different poster. I am not “Coolbrezze.”</p>
<p>Oh, I see.</p>
<p>Anything new on the investigation?</p>
<p>Check it out: [Daily</a> Tar Heel - Students affirm free speech](<a href=“http://www.dailytarheel.com/news/university/students-affirm-free-speech-1.1719845]Daily”>http://www.dailytarheel.com/news/university/students-affirm-free-speech-1.1719845)</p>
<p>The YWC group on Facebook keep it real mature by posting this thread: [Video</a> from UNC | Facebook](<a href=“Redirecting...”>Redirecting...)</p>
<p>I don’t agree with all of the protesters (namely, the ones who became overzealous), but I can’t say I wouldn’t protest a group like that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see anything immature in that thread, unless you are referring to the idiots featured causing trouble in the video. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think that anyone really has a problem with the protesters that behaved in a reasonable matter; rather, it was the ones that acted like spoiled children (placing a large banner in front of Mr. Tancredo’s face, shouting “**** you, we know where you sleep at night”, assaulting police officers, disrupting the speech, and breaking windows that people have a problem with. Also, SDS is an issue as well, as they are the only group there that has still refused to offer a sincere apology for the incident.</p>
<p>Young Democrats issued an apology, so I don’t see the big problem with SDS not doing so. Also, the immaturity lies in this statement: “A huge thank you to the leftists, who behaved like the spoiled children they are.”</p>
<p>He basically called all “leftists” or liberals spoiled children because he disagrees with them. Also, the other comments are extremely ignorant and immature as well. Did you read those?</p>
<p>IMO, YWC really needs to be stopped from inviting speakers. I understand their right to free speech, but honestly, they make me sick and seem like only a step down from the KKK. Tom Tancredo is their National Chairman. Did you guys know that? I didn’t know until I went to YWC’s website…some of the things they stand for, frankly, show blatant disrespect.</p>
<p>Just as Ken said: “Tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance at all.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>YDs and SDS are different groups. SDS was apparently the group causing all of the trouble, while YDs was pretty moderate from what I gathered. I don’t even think YDs needed to apologize, but SDS was definitely in the wrong. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What is more immature: posting a relatively mild comment online, or doing what the SDS and other liberal-wahoos did on Tuesday?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“I understand their right to free speech, but honestly…I don’t agree with what they say, so they shouldn’t be allowed to say it” is more of what you are trying to say. That is a very scary attitude-are you aware that UNC almost lost its charter because of bans that it placed on speakers during the 1960s? Freedom of speech belongs to everyone, and people like you trying to stifle it are frankly not only frightening to many (including the ACLU, who nearly never sides with conservatives) but are directly against the values that this nation was built on. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Who cares? Tom Tancredo is a former congressman who has some controversial ideas, but he certainly has the right to express them. Some of the causes that SDS support can be tied to terrorism, but as long as they aren’t resorting to violence then they have a right to be here as well. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The only people exhibiting intolerance on Tuesday night were the wacked-out liberal protesters who resorted to violence to make sure that the only views heard were their own. Thankfully, they have been roundly condemned for their immaturity and hate, but surprisingly some people (like yourself) seem to think that they were justified.</p>
<p>You need to calm down, step back, and take a look at some of the things you wrote. I believe in free speech, but I don’t believe in racism. And someone who has the views of a white supremacist should have received protest. I don’t think the protesters should have been overzealous like they were, but peaceful protest (which was exhibited as well) should have been expected.</p>
<p>I never said anything about “wacked-out” Conservative people, so your insulting statements about liberals were totally unnecessary. I don’t see why there needs to be an argument about it…I simply offered my opinion on it.</p>
<p>Yes, some of the protesters were disrespectful and should not have been. But the rest were justified, and to say that they weren’t is a violation of your precious free speech.</p>
<p>Yeah, sorry. There’s no reason the university needs to tolerate racism in order to promote free speech. As I said, tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance at all. </p>
<p>While I respect people’s rights for free speech, I don’t believe the university should have invited a well known racist to speak (Tancredo)… and I’m rather concerned that there’s a derivative of a white nationalist group that’s been created on campus.</p>
<p>That has nothing to do with wanting to prevent free speech, and honestly, it’s disheartening to see people have the wrong idea about what the first amendment says.</p>
<p>The right of free speech means the government isn’t going to come and arrest you for saying something, no law can be created to infringe upon your rights to say it.</p>
<p>It does NOT mean that a university, television show, newspaper, etc, is required to give you a platform from which to spew forth your ideas.</p>
<p>Now, I don’t agree with the decision for the university to have invited him, however, that doesn’t give these other groups the right to act as they did. Protest? Sure, but trying to disrupt the event and damaging property serves no purpose.</p>
<p>I agree with every point of Ken’s. HA!</p>
<p>Interestingly enough, just because someone may be a well known racist doesn’t guarantee that everything they say will be hate speech, or threatening, or in some way illegal.</p>
<p>If you hate Tancredo, that’s great. If you think everyone in the world should disagree with what he says, that’s great, too. But the way to make that happen is to allow him to speak, and then disagree.</p>
<p>Tancredo being racist isn’t illegal. Nor is him sharing his racist opinions. Regretfully, Carolina wasn’t able to determine exactly what his deal was regarding this issue because he was never able to speak. Maybe some of what he was going to say had a drop of reason, maybe there would be SOMETHING positive out of him coming - but because he was stopped from delivering his message, we’ll never know.</p>
<p>Extreme doesn’t necessarily mean illegal. UNC should allow anyone who wants to come speak an opportunity to speak, so long as they always allow venue for debate.</p>
<p>Maybe some people are worried about the image it gives UNC to invite these types to come to the school. Frankly, I’d be worried if we only invited super liberals.</p>