Women are just as wrong to contribute to the breakdown of morality, but men can say *No* instead of acting like animals in rut.
Posted on 12/19/2011 6:29:33 AM PST by Libloather
Vermont fraternity chapter closed indefinitely over rape survey
LISA RATHKE - Staff Writer
9:53 a.m. EST, December 17, 2011
MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — A University of Vermont fraternity whose members are accused of circulating a survey that asked who they would like to rape has been closed indefinitely.
The national Sigma Phi Epsilon made the announcement Friday after an internal investigation and lengthy discussions with the university in Burlington.
"Without suggesting that every member had knowledge of this questionnaire, the questions asked in the document are deplorable and absolutely inconsistent with our values," said Brian Warren, executive director of the national fraternity organization based in Richmond, Va.
The national organization has said there's no indication the questionnaire was sanctioned by the fraternity or distributed to the more than 50 members of the Vermont chapter.
(Excerpt) Read more at fox8.com ...
What constituted the “investigation”, why was there no hearing offered to the Fraternity? Thanks for the insults by the way. You are way off base. Yes morality is the basis of laws. This is a Free Speech issue. You seem to confuse that with actually engaging in Sexual Assault not asking a question. I hope you enjoy the repudiation of Free Speech to favor Thought control. PC is political correctness which is also polite tyranny. No thanks I have seen and known a Man sent to a Gulag for a Thought crime.
Now if this was a College sponsored by a Church or community of faith with a morals clause in the enrollment that would be a different matter. This was some innocuous survey, in questionable taste, even vulgar. It was not a crime.
We have excuse the word Cuntfests, Sex Clinics, Masturbation and Sex Toy demonstrations on our Colleges. Yet one idiot posts a survey and we close a Fraternity. How is that fair and equitable? It is a clear double standard to pander to Women. You are doing the Feminists job and especially the Gender and Radical Feminists job for them.
What we actually have here is the effects of the causation of removing Millions of Fathers from their families. We have had an implosion of morals and decency ever since. Who has promoted this? The Radical Feminists especially. We have young Women on our College campuses engaged in a moral sewer with Dating replaced with “Hook Ups”. The Garbage generation is a well thought out explanation of this phenomenon. As to instituting morality. We are placing all responsibility right now on One Gender Men. Women are exempt as their sexual expression is “empowerment”. Reason and principle is replaced with Feelings and sensitivity.
So in order not to offend the Women on campuses we punish Young Men. Who are not stupid and see this heavy handed double standard and say. Screw going to College it is like going to Prison. The reality is a moral nation supports moral behavior. As the populace embraces a lack of morality in order to maintain order our Liberty and Freedoms are restricted. We are giving up our Freedoms for order and security.
That is the lamest sorry excuse for libertarian, anarchist thinking to ever be used and yet libertarian types never fail to trot it out.
Every law on the books is morality and ethics enforced by the state?
Or do you purpose doing away with laws against murder, rape, perjury, theft, slander, vandalism, etc?
I have some more bad news brace yourself. The comments being made by young Men. Young Women are choosing Bad Boys. Yes Women still are the gatekeepers of sexual morality. That will never change. Young Women want Mr. Right Now, not Mr. Right. They are actually picking Men who are high status over Men who are decent and honorable.
So in order to protect Women from their bad choices, we decide to punish Men. This is a strategy doomed to fail. It will not work and is actually promoting the worst behavior in our Men. You reap what you sow. You sow the wind, you Reap the Whirlwind.
As to the Lady who posted the rubbish that I would propose ending Rape, Murder and other Crimes, it is a weak Straw Man argument you have put forth. Try again. You punish the bad behavior, you are trying to punish bad thoughts.
Coeds boycotting such behavior will do alot more to change it than Fraternity groups punishing young Men for “Thought Crimes”. Peer pressure will have a greater impact than this attempt to punish the group for the actions of one or two idiots.
Women are just as wrong to contribute to the breakdown of morality, but men can say *No* instead of acting like animals in rut.
Men ought to be holding other men accountable.
And that is the lamest sorry excuse for a rebuttal to ever be used.
Each of those acts involves ACTUAL HARM to another person. See the difference?
When the state says that it is illegal to think immoral thoughts, or talk about unethical things, that's when libertarians have a problem with it.
When Men or Women break the Law they must face the consequences. No law was broken here. This was a survey. With a inappropriate question asked. So Metmom you are actually advocating thought control? That is sorry to say UnAmerican. You want to eliminate Free Speech to control questionable or vulgar thinking? Would you advocate the elimination of the Bill of Rights to do so? Who makes the decision of what is questionable morality? Obama? CAIR? Do we impose Sharia in order to promote Moral behavior? I believe many Mullahs would agree with you.
Do you think NAMBLA should be allowed to promote and discuss homosexual pedophilia or not? They not only advocate homosexual pedophilia but have detailed instructions on how to “groom” boys and get their trust so that the can rape them.
Should that be protected under the First Amendment or not, according to you?
I posit that it should absolutely not be protected.
No they aren't. Each of us are responsible for our own choices. Your excuse is an old one. As old as Adam and Eve.
What happened when Eve at the apple? Nothing. What happened when Adam ate it? The earth and everything in it and on it was condemned. ADAM was responsible and ADAM should have said "No!". Men are to lead by example and they're leading right down into the sewer.
Another crap answer and question. What you are pushing is leftist moral relativism. And anarchy.
God is the arbiter of morals. Otherwise you are stating that whoever is in power gets to choose or you're pushing anarchy. There is no in between.
God says to control every thought. If you LET your mind wander into filth, that's where you'll reside.
Are you actually saying that they are too young to know right and wrong?!
I think Godwin’s Law can be invoked here.
In the discussion of morality and religion, the first one to compare the other to islamists concedes the debate.
That’s another sorry tactic of the religion hating side.
As a man thinks in his heart, so is he.
Actions are the fruit of the thoughts. If someone is going to have his mind in the sewer, he will act it out sooner or later.
As far as what’s going on here, the action was taken by the group at the national level and was not the actions of the government. The headquarters of the group had every right to censure the chapter under it’s purview.
So now you are asserting all the young women here choose to have some frat rats draw up a survey on which ones to rape?
Really?
Exactly - this is a natural law.
I often try to point this fact out to liberaltarians, and they refuse to see the simple truth. Unrestrained hedonism will always lead to chaos and anarchy, which then eventual ushers in the Big Dog of ultimate jackbooted thugism, which they all claim to hate. And then the powerful make the rules. There are two choices about morality:
1. Following the standard, universal moral absolutes described in religions.
2. Each human decides for themselves what's good and bad, right and wrong. Which of course quickly ushers in the aforementioned chaos and anarchy. It's so simple a 5 or 6 year old child can understand this.
They also claim to want to return to what the founders intended. Their problem is that THEY had morality laws on a state level. ALL states had them.
We were a chapter of a big, old national fraternity. For years during the 70s my chapter was kicked off campus, suspended, made inactive, etc. It was the party house, among party houses.
But today it cleaned up. This link shows the brothers participating with the campus young ladies, in a hot dog eating contest, to raise money for charity.
Another article on the site shows that two chapters were closed.
Finally, my fraternity turned out veterans, at least one Fortune 500 CEO, two Superior Court judges, etc.
The amazing thing was the huge number of beautiful young women who turned out when we announced a party. During the summer 1967 known as "Thursday Night Party" when we sold silk-screen T-shirts, to pay for 7 kegs of beer.
Then a few brothers went to Vietnam and got killed.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Interesting discussion. How far should freedom of speech" go? Are NAMBLA instruction manuals - "how to" guides to groom boys for turning them into victims covered by the First Amendment? And another point is - this fraternity is a private organizations. They have the freedom to disallow obscenity and the advocation of rape even if the government is curtailed by a stupid ruling (or maybe more than one in this regard) by the SCOTUS years ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.