Supremes to Colleges: Military Recruiter Bans Illegal

It's starting to look like MassaMortkat has got himself yet another ID, eh Mele??

Anon

0 Replies

I think, Anon might be right here,but I am not sure. :wink:

Nevertheless, mele42846, it would be nice to add the "eler" at my name - I rather like it since it's my own for some decades now and that of our family since 1287. Thanks.

0 Replies

It is possible to be too polite, Walter. Personally, I can't take anyone seriously if they can't make their point without corrupting another member's name.

I make exception for myself, of course, when I ust BLT.

0 Replies

That's okay, rgr!

0 Replies

Corrupting another's name? Oh, that is done all of the time. I am dead set against it since it is not polite. Of course, inadvertent entries will happen. But, to go back to the topic of the thread--

It is absolutely incredible that the USSC has ruled 8-0 that the Military Organizations may recruit on campus.

If we look around the world, we see enlightened countries who would NEVER ALLOW such atrocities.

The Bush Administration and the US military should pay close attention to the country which should serve as their model--Germany--A country which does not know the meaning of militarism!!!!

0 Replies

Its about as clear as it cud be.
Thay shud not accept the money
if unwilling to accept the recruiters.

A deal is a deal.
David

0 Replies

mele42846 wrote:

It is absolutely incredible that the USSC has ruled 8-0 that the Military Organizations may recruit on campus.

That's not what they decided though. They decided the military can recruit on campus if and when any other employer can -- and only if the university chooses to accept money from the federal government, which the military is part of.

0 Replies

mele42846 wrote:

It is absolutely incredible that the USSC has ruled 8-0 that the Military Organizations may recruit on campus.

If we look around the world, we see enlightened countries who would NEVER ALLOW such atrocities.

We can and we WILL make our own decisions WITHOUT
looking around the world for guidance.

0 Replies

Anyway, all those 'oppressed' universities can ban the military from campus by refusing all that nice taxpayer provided money. I'm sure that their philosophial integrity would also approve a campaign to steer ex-military types and their supporters, friends, and families from enrolling on those campuses and to discourage pro-military donors from donating to the university.. It is only logical that if they don't want the recruiters, they would also not want anybody who was ever a soldier or who ever admired a soldier or any such tainted monies. (Note to the humor challenged: this is satirical sarcasm.)

Sometimes human hypocrisy is absolutely stunning however. I wonder how long it would take the university to adopt a new official attitude about the military if they were actualy shunned by the military and its supporters?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Anyway, all those 'oppressed' universities can ban the military from campus by refusing all that nice taxpayer provided money.

Or by refusing all recruiters and letting students organize their own job fairs off-campus. I imagine that's even easier.

Side note to Mele: This former physics student from Germany has attended at least five job fairs at his university in Munich. The Bundeswehr has always had a booth at that fair. Many students shunned this booth and its operator, just as all American students remain free to do. But the mere fact that the Bundeswehr had a booth was never made an issue by any of the university's students, professors, faculties or departments. I'd say this experience is fairly typical at German universities. (Walter?)

0 Replies

Effectively, the contract is that in exchange for cash
from the public treasury,
the universities will allow access for military recruiters,
the same as other potential employers.

As true liberals,
the leftists at the universities
desire to reap the benefits of the deal,
while renigging on their end of the bargain.
David

0 Replies

I did not underline anything
in my post ( above ).

I don 't understand Y the underlining appeared.
David

0 Replies

See: Text ads within forum content

0 Replies

The Good Guys Win One!!!

SANTA CRUZ
Military recruiters, confronted by crowd, leave campus job fair
Anti-war protesters at university block doors to building

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/12/BAG3KI7INT1.DTL

Anon

0 Replies

See?! This is how free speech/assembly is SUPPOSED to work!

0 Replies

What about the recruiters' rights of free speech? Squelched. Is that okay so long as it's for a cause you support?

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

What about the recruiters' rights of free speech? Squelched. Is that okay so long as it's for a cause you support?

I agree with Tico here. I have no problem with protests and demonstrations against the recruiters. But don't see how it makes you a "good guy" if you prevent willing students from talking to a willing military recruiter. Or slash the tires of the recruiter's cars.

0 Replies

Preventing the excercize of a constitutionally guaranteed practice - in this case the activities of the recruiters - is not free speech, it is the denial of same. The right to demonstrate does not equal the right to intimidate, threaten, assault, or damage the property of others, paricularly with intent of preventing those others from excersizing their rights. The students' action were criminal.

The school, having failed to take adequate action to prevent the illegal activity of the student group despite reasonable grounds to have expected such, should be made to forfeit Federal funding, and the organizers of the protest should face civil and criminal charges for having violated the rights of the recruiters and for preventing the school from fulfilling its obligation under the Solomon act.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

Preventing the excercize of a constitutionally guaranteed practice - in this case the activities of the recruiters - is not free speech, it is the denial of same. The right to demonstrate does not equal the right to intimidate, threaten, assault, or damage the property of others, paricularly with intent of preventing those others from excersizing their rights. The students' action were criminal.

The school, having failed to take adequate action to prevent the illegal activity of the student group despite reasonable grounds to have expected such, should be made to forfeit Federal funding, and the organizers of the protest should face civil and criminal charges for having violated the rights of the recruiters and for preventing the school from fulfilling its obligation under the Solomon act.

I second that, Timber. In this case the school should be held accountable to rectify an unacceptable situation and discipline students engaged in unlawful acts on school property. Any school advocating assault and/or battery or other illegal acts by the student body and/or faculty should indeed lose not only it federal funding, but it accreditation.

0 Replies

When the Military stops discriminating against Gays, perhaps they'll have a moral leg to stand on. Until then, let them sell their lies from the gutter where they belong.

Anon

0 Replies

Supremes to Colleges: Military Recruiter Bans Illegal

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know