Maybe his crime was he wasn't 19 years old.
Posted on 07/23/2013 7:15:08 PM PDT by oxcart
DETROIT (AP) -- A college student suspended for writing an essay called "Hot for Teacher" has no First Amendment right to express his sexual attraction to his instructor, a judge said Tuesday.
Joseph Corlett's lawsuit was dismissed by U.S. District Judge Patrick Duggan, who ruled in favor of Oakland University in suburban Detroit.
When Corlett referred to his teacher as "'stacked' and graphically compared her to a sitcom character he fetishized in a writing assignment, he brought a pig into the parlor," Duggan said.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
Well, what does she look like?
So only hardcore porn is protected by the first amendment?
This is what entitlement brings.
Mommy and Daddy’s little boy can do no wrong, why he’s “special” - his behavior is always excused, no matter how odd or socially awkward. He’s just “expressing himself”.
The teacher should be able to expel him from her class, with a “F” for his grade, and his permanent transcript. Perhaps the school should hold a board to see if this is the caliber of student they want want to represent their Alma Mater.
What happens when this little spoiled child is expected to behave like a professional? Is he magically going to start reigning in his thoughts and behavior? Is he magically going to censor what he says in a crowd?
Or, will he remain true to form; and as a company representative - expose his employer to a large sexual harassment lawsuit?
A Muslim could get away with it. In that culture, women are simply chattel. From a political and religious viewpoint, women would be seen as mere objects for use by a man in a man’s world. First Amendment protection would seem a no brainer. But, if you are not of the protected class, then you must be politically correct at all times.
Maybe his crime was he wasn't 19 years old.
Wow, she looks blonde, sexy and stacked to me!!
I would have to see teacher before passing judgement.
Only an Fugly woman with horribly low self esteem would handle thisin the manner being exacted.
Maybe he should’ve ended his piece by burning the flag. THAT is protected speech and the litmus test for “protection” was if there was ANY social redeeming value in the work.
I tend to agree with the ruling. It has less to do with the actual content than it did with the personal nature of the writing. It is the same thing if you anger your boss with an email and he fires you.
Yeah...a tad bit inconsistent, eh?
Where did he get the pig? Did he have a pig fetish?
Is the judge a muslim?
I don’t get it...
So can an atheist professor kick you out for citing God in one of your writings?
Stacked...with that sort of erudition, how could she possibly fail to be impressed....?
colleges will fail you for citing wikipedia as a source
I
ruling is correct
Get a load of this email from the instructor, Pamela Mitzefeld. She is afraid of Corlett because he has a “gun obsession.”
http://thefire.org/public/pdfs/9250dff8b0960db30f46fac58acd4d1c.pdf?direct
People just get off on over-reacting.
Okay, now we’re getting to what the real issue is.
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.