<p>@ CCBolts, I’m sorry if you misconstrued what I meant by religious groups. Sure, there are religious groups out there that provide social mobility and aid to those who need it. However, there are also those that advocate things which i’d rather leave unmentioned because, this is not a thread about religion.</p>
<p>^ right I agree there are bad groups, but they are in the minority. there are vastly more religious groups that do good in the world. but your right this is not a thread about religion. my original point was simply that we shouldn’t point to the idiots that exist in any (and every) group as an example that everyone that identifies with that group is equally (insert negative claim).</p>
<p>All in favor of acknowledging the fact that those students are fools, type “I”</p>
<p>After saying this, we must realize that the very fact that we are arguing about this gives those fools attention. This is their mission, to arouse attention. They have achieved it by having someone start this thread and having random people all across the world argue over it.</p>
<p>Cool story, bro.</p>
<p>Tengo sucka!!!</p>
<p>Remember, no Russian.</p>
<p>I understand your points that they might’ve disrupted the talk, however, do you really believe that because they did so they had to be arrested and expelled? That is utter nonsense!</p>
<p>^ Arrested? Yes it’s called disturbing the peace. Even if these students were claiming to have been practicing “civil disobedience” they should be aware that Dr. King preached that when you disobey something you believe to be unjust (break rules/laws) you also accept the consequences for your disobedience. That is how a true activist makes his or her point. Expelled? for a one time offence, no. but if there was a certain student who organized the disruption and continued to organize groups intent on violating the schools ethics of decency and free speech, yes expulsion should be perused.</p>
<p>@christian612</p>
<p>Your fallacy of composition reflects badly upon you and your poor attempt to argue.</p>
<p>“Fallacy of composition” It’s a logical fallacy as you said, but most people use different forms of argument that are very successful strategically, especially considering who the audience might be. Logic is dead, echoing Neitzches famous “god is dead” quote, is the best way to put it. Of course logic is not really dead because it was never alive to begin with, but if it were alive, the people on this message board would have raped and pillaged it long ago. Including myself from time to time. I have needs you know. If anyone believed that their logic had holes, they would have “adorned something far gaudier,” as H.L Mencken put it. So it’s not that logic is misused, it’s that its not flashy enough to get what most people want, and that’s attention. For academic papers, however, it’s essential, so most people on this board should be versed in logic, yet they choose not to display it here.</p>
<p>^ made me chuckle and i learned something. bravo sir.</p>
<p>Please drop the act, Nujabes.</p>
<p>Everybody read this article: [Salam</a> Al Marayati: Free 11 Muslim Students Representing America’s Conscience](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Free 11 Muslim Students Representing America's Conscience | HuffPost Los Angeles)
Quote from article:
“Two individuals heckled the President at Notre Dame’s commencement last year when President Obama resided as principal speaker. “Abortion is murder!” and “Stop Killing Babies!” they yelled, after which they were escorted out.”
People are usually just escorted out when stuff like this happens, but no, because they are Muslims they need to be treated like scum, right? :@
I’ve seen many videos on Youtube where protesters speak out and are merely escorted out! But arrested and expelled? What has the world come to!</p>
<p>I don’t understand why the Muslims get picked on either. Everyone knows that left handed Jews and all women are the real terrorists.</p>
<p>ivyambition - I can agree with you about the first shouter (just being escorted out), even though any standard of free exchange of ideas says that this kind of behavior cannot be tolerated. But once the others were warned, they crossed a much brighter line. If there are no real consequences to actions such as these, then no controversial figure will ever be able to speak on a college campus. Who really wants to attend a lecture or speech with constant interruptions? Their behavior wasn’t only unfair and disrespectful to the ambassador, it was also unfair and disrespectful to all in attendance who wanted to hear what he had to say, ask questions later, and do so in an environment of civility.</p>
<p>So yes, after the first protester suspension or expulsion is a potentially very appropriate penalty. For those that were not actually students, then arrest for disturbing the peace is also appropriate since they have no right at all to come onto the campus and behave in such a way. Under your theory people could go into any class being taught on a subject they think is a hot-button issue and disrupt the class, and there should be no consequences to that either. How does that not lead to anything but anarchy?</p>
<p>And please, don’t give us that bull that it doesn’t happen to anyone but Muslims. Right wingers say it doesn’t happen to anyone but them, gays say it doesn’t happen to anyone but them, etc. etc. Just BS.</p>
<p>Vintij, that is very offensive to me and to many other Muslims. Are you insinuating that all Muslims are terrorists? Would people like it if someone said all Americans are fat or dumb? We all share a common humanity- and, in fact, extremists are a very small minority- we don’t even consider them as Muslims because it is forbidden for Muslims, according to the religion, to murder innocentsan act that Israel did in Gaza last year. </p>
<p>Also, terrorism by definition means: the pursuit of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims- therefore, by definition, England, America (the Iraq/Afghan war), etc etc would all be terrorists.</p>
<p>Is there something undesirable about non-propriety? Or is the disdain for the theoretical opposite of it rather than branches of it? As Jane Austen put it “how quick come the reasons for approving what we like,” which suggests that what we like is different from what others like, and different from what we don’t like, not that it’s the exact opposite of it. You have to miss the old days don’t you? When everything was simply punishable by death. Pure simplicity, purely reasonable and the exact opposite of the anarchy you dislike, if there exists such a duality. </p>
<p>As for ivyambition, clearly you didn’t have your coffee today as the humor of defining terrorism goes right over your head, along with my previous post. I won’t say you should lower your ambition (referring to your name), but I guess I just did. This making claims business is so difficult to get around when someone looks for the nearest exit of pure discourse, or rather, looking to be offended. Then again, I’m nobody to judge your strategy of argument, only someone that should, from time to time, dismember it completely and hide the parts of it under your floorboard in good fun; above which I lay a carpet and pay my daily respects to my three dozen and a half gods.</p>
<p>Fallenchemist, I understand you point of view, however, I don’t wholly agree with it. If you read the article, it seems that these 11 Muslim students were punished in an entirely different way that anybody else would’ve been; that shows a high level of discrimination. I understand that they could’ve been more civil, however, they did not deserve that type of punishment to be imposed. Yes, I agree that there is a time and place for everything, and the university should take some action against the students, however, penalizing them with such severity makes me question the underlying politics of America. I am not American, nor do I live there, however, I always viewed American politics as straightforward and egalitarian, especially since the country has undergone many different social reforms in its lifetime. Such egalitarian principles don’t seem to apply to Muslims.
There have been speeches and talks I’ve seen with multiple interruptions, but the people who interrupted were never arrested.</p>
<p>ivyambition - I also don’t totally disagree with you IF these students were indeed punished disproportionately. However, we cannot know if this was actually their first offense. Also in other cases the disruptors usually are not warned as often as these students were. I also do not know exactly what they said, it was hard to make out on the video. So there are a lot of facts we don’t know. What we do know is that their behavior was not only unacceptable, it accomplished nothing except to probably alienate people that might have been more moderate about the issue (if that’s even possible).</p>
<p>Anyway, it is fine to generalize sometimes, but this is a specific case of which we know few of the details.</p>
<p>It isn’t like the cops came in and did a sweep of the protesters and pulled out 11 of them right off the bat. It started with kids simply being escorted out.</p>
<p>Eventually people kept yelling out “your a murderer mo<strong><em>fo</em></strong>” every time the guy spoke, and a University official gave a clear and serious warning after each outbreak.</p>
<p>Unfortunately the students didn’t take any of the university officials seriously. They could have easily avoided expulsion and jail, but they decided to test the limits.</p>