“The majority of students thought it was insensitive, especially in light of the controversial Jena 6 case in Louisiana.”
Which actually had nothing at all to do with nooses.
I always suspected that Art Majors were closet rednecks.
I have to wonder if the ‘Art Exhibit’ would have been removed, if the nooses had had a cross being ‘strangled’ by them.
The ‘fine line’ between Art and offense, is only defined by Liberals, and depends entirely upon whom it does and does not offend. Conservatives, Republicans, Christians, and white heterosexual males need not apply.
Kind of a dumb statement... if it was 50% black people, it would have been OK as far as he was concerned? My guess is that Nick Winbush is not here on a calculus scholarship....
“Even with art, there is a boundary that you have to stay within and you can’t overstep that boundary, especially with our past,” said MU sophomore, Dan Morris.
Yep, a cross in urine is art... but a noose... nope, that’s hate speech. Right.
Of course they probably have no problem with the health center providing abortion referrals, a practice which has killed more blacks than even brothers with guns.
Dearh threats are now “class projects” in the DemoPervet Acadania?
It’s the Admins and staff at these schools who need
“academic review” and one strtike probation.
>>The university removed the noose and tire saying the display was insensitive.<<
But if someone puts a crucifix in urine, that’s acceptable.
How does a tire represent life and children? Was it a Goodyear?
It reminds me of the necklaceing (Placing a burning tire around a persons neck with their hands tied behind them) done by the black Communists in South Africa while blaming the whites for the “evil” of Apartheid.