Posted on 05/13/2006 6:02:50 PM PDT by SteveH
Ga. Tech defends gay-inclusive policies
Lawsuit among rising tide of challenges to so-called ‘speech codes’
By DYANA BAGBY
Friday, May 12, 2006
Responding this week to a federal lawsuit filed by two students against the Georgia Institute of Technology, state attorneys said the public university’s policies do not limit the free speech rights of those who oppose gay rights.
Tech does not "prohibit or restrict expressive speech or activity by students or their organizations. Students, faculty and friends of Tech have the right to make statements as they please in the public areas without fear of reprisals," Assistant Attorney General Tamara J. Wayland wrote in court documents filed May 10 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
Georgia Tech, located in downtown Atlanta, was sued March 16 by Southern Baptist student Ruth Malhotra and Jewish student Orit Sklar, both represented by the Alliance Defense Fund, a conservative legal group.
(Excerpt) Read more at southernvoice.com ...
Universities have every right to enforce their own code of conduct. Just as you don't have the right to speak "freely" at work...
The First Amendment protects speech against the government. It is not a license to say what you want, whenever you want, and wherever you want.
This was my school so
I have an ax to grind here
This is an Engineering School
It cranks out excellent Engineers
This is its task, it is viciously difficult.
It has no business espousing one way or another
Political movements, religion, orientation issues, etc.
Metaphysics, politics, and social issues are for mere mortals
All this should be a null hypothesis to an Engineer.
Calculus, Physics, Fluid dynamics, and Transport theory
Should be enough for this environment,
And the rest, for the time, merely a distraction
Georgia Tech should know better...
I am a firm believer that sexually based politics of any sort deserves a rapid destruction by any means possible.
Responding this week to a federal lawsuit filed by two students against the Georgia Institute of Technology, state attorneys said the public university’s policies do not limit the free speech rights of those who oppose gay rights.
"Gay Rights"
Is the university upholding "gay rights" when there is no such animal?
Do the state attorneys contend they are attempting to balance the nonexistent absurd construct of "Gay Rights" with what are Constitutionally guaranteed rights of free speech?
Maybe the state attorneys do not see the forest for the trees when objectively they are in essence stating that the State of Georgia via the Georgia Institute of Technology prefers the homosexual version of free speech OVER that of others -going so far as to misrepresent speech opposing homosexual activity as speech opposing the leftist construct termed "Gay Rights"...
Are the State Attorneys whacko? The State should lose this case hands down...
And, if the university receives large bundles of federal grant dollars?
People are paying serious money for those students to be there and big gobs of it comes from the “government” (i.e., my wallet).
If anyone should be shut up, it is the homo-activists and the perverts who are only at school to cause trouble... the universities need to serve their customers, not the freaks...
"Universities have every right to enforce their own code of conduct."
Georgia Tech is a State University, it is not private.
It doesnt matter if it is private or not.
The military is funded by the federal government, and obviously it can set its own rules for conduct, including limits on "free speech".
You miss the obvious fact that providing for the defense overrides some free speech rights in the case of the military.
Government rules can not violate rights UNLESS there is another legitimate consideration superceding the practice of said rights...
The "gay Rights" fallacy the State Attorneys wish to hand wave into existence is not a legitimate consideration; whereas maintaining order might be...
Can you provide a direct argument to support your position in this real case? No platitudes or analogies are necessary...
So they are promoting a lifestyle choice that kills you 20 years early. Next they'll be promoting smoking (isn't that a genetic habit?) in the name of "tolerance."
Of course you are referring to a government, not private, university here, restricting freedom of religion. ANd not some made up for publicity religion.
When can we look forward to getting extra credit for being a knob-goblin in American Universities?
I'm not getting drawn into another hateful anti-gay argument with you, DBeers. You're obsessive homophobia clouds your thinking.
I guarantee that if the ACLU sued for the free speech of gays in high schools, you'd be the first to squeal and cry about how schools are for learning, not for pontificating about social issues. You are rallying around THIS lawsuit because it's right up your homophobic alley, so to speak.
Oops... Lunatic Fringe already had to resort to name calling and the emotional, "you're a hater," argument. Convenient how Lunatic Fringe was able to spew hate as he announced that he was not going to discuss this with DBeers. Goin' down in flames......
And where did I call a person a name..?
The last time I looked, the State of Georgia was the govenment there.
Now, if you want to argue that the Bill of Rights just applies to the Feds, and that the states can establish religion, ban guns, and control speech and press, force confessions, and arrest without probable cause, make that clear.
Also, the University I attend has a similar speech code and "free speech area". It works well, as I am not harassed by blue-haired weirdo peaceniks on my way to class. Our Young Republican group had a "Catch an Illegal Immigrant" Day and it went quite well. They've also held rallies opposing gay rights and were not disciplined for violating the code of conduct regarding hate speech.
"The military is funded by the federal government,.."
I think the military enjoys a special status, being that their job is primarily to kill people and break things, as Rush says.
I think a public U. is considered as part of the gov't, unlike a private school. If you are a private school you have a lot more ability to discriminate, restrict, etc. than you do if you are public. I'm not saying I agree with all this stuff, but I can see the logic in saying that the State U is NOT a private enterprise.
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.