• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

FAU Student Claims He Was Suspended For Refusing To Step On Jesus

Rotela was apparently found to be in violation of FAU's civility code. If the professor thinks the student has violated the civility code, he is, de facto, suspended from that class until a resolution is reached. The process begins at the instructor level and can move up from that.

From NBC:

His lawyer Hiram Sasser shared the notice of charges that Rotela received from FAU for violating the student code of conduct.

"You are requested to attend a Student Conduct Conference," the notice read.
"In the interim, you may not attend class (SPC 3710) or contact any of the students involved in this matter – verbally or electronically – or by any other means," the notice stated.

Florida school apologizes after students stomp on 'Jesus' - U.S. News

FAU - home page
 
Aunt Spiker said:
So - now you're irritated with his irritation over your irritation and he's the only one who's intolerant?

:rofl

Yeah - preach that intolerance speech, again.
Click to expand...

I don't care about any of it - but if people have questions or opinions I will certainly answer them.

I'm sorry I even shared that story or that part of my life....

Sorry for being human....
 
I'm glad the scumbag non-tenured professor got slapped down. I'm also quite disappointed that only one student had the juevos to refuse.
 
Mr.Nick said:
I don't care about any of it - but if people have questions or opinions I will certainly answer them.

I'm sorry I even shared that story or that part of my life....

Sorry for being human....
Click to expand...

There you go - your professor is just human, too.

Life's big fat lesson.
 
Fenton said:
Poor Liberals, too wrapped up in a corrupt ideology, they're too blind to notice the obvious.

Hey if you wouldn't step on a paper, publicly with the word Muhammed written on it, how is this whole issue just about words ?
Click to expand...

Reading comprehension much? I said I'd step on any piece of paper. I can tell the difference between paper and things. Apparently this fundie (like muslim fundies) can't.
 
Fenton said:
Oh please.

Focus for one minute. There is more than one way to teach the value of words.

Disrespecting any cultural icon or religious icon or symbol should be out of the question.?
Click to expand...

Oh rubbish. Colleges are secular institutions. And stepping on a piece of paper with a word on it doesn't disrespect anything but a piece of paper.

In any case, the student had a perfect right to say no, and that would have made the professor's point and brought the lesson home. But apparently he flew off the handle as conservatives and fundies are wont to do, being insecure in their beliefs.
 
Mr.Nick said:
No one gets "suspended" in college - they're just "not welcome" in particular classes.... We're talking college here not High School.

It's more like being banned - well it is being banned from taking a particular "class." of course you can take the class/course again just with a different "professor/teacher."
Click to expand...

You seemed to be making things up at this point. Professor's can't 'ban' paying students from a class they are enrolled in. If a professor claims the student is disruptive, he's have to put in a complaint to have him disciplined, including -- mirabile dictu -- a suspension. But professors don't have any such authority. At least not in any college I know about. So the story is garbled.

Where do you get your information -- Breitbart.com?
 
Mr.Nick said:
I got banned from a sociology course - well, the classroom. I passed the course, I just wasn't welcome in the damn room.. He didn't like it when I called him a monkey just to get a reaction then write a paper about it to prove his theory of tolerance was epic bull****...
Click to expand...


Your paper "proved" nothing other than the usual arrogant undergrad propensity to think one knows more than a person who has spent years studying a subject.

What race was the professor? What caused you to call him a monkey? Did he eat bananas in a funny way? Maybe he walked around hunched over with his knuckles dragging on the ground?


If you passed the course - without attending class - it would appear the professor was somewhat tolerant of your adolescent behaviour.
 
Un biased said:
Fire the teacher if he did not have enough common sense to realize this would really upset people he should not be a professor , understand symbolism and all but could he have chosen something else or maybe just put the word god since there are many religions with gods if it wasn't a particular one a student may realize something about themselves, than bye just using a very particular religion .
Click to expand...


Take the time to read a bit before posting and displaying ignorance on the subject. The professor had taught this class before, the exercise came out of the textbook used for the class.

What makes the name "Jesus" special? This is south Florida we are discussing, the odds being very high that there were Hispanic students in the class, one of them could even have the name or know someone named "Jesus"
 
head of joaquin said:
Oh rubbish.
Colleges are secular institutions. And stepping on a piece of paper with a word on it doesn't disrespect anything but a piece of paper.

In any case, the student had a perfect right to say no, and that would have made the professor's point and brought the lesson home. But apparently he flew off the handle as conservatives and fundies are wont to do, being insecure in their beliefs.
Click to expand...

If that was the case why did the " University" issue an apology ?

And this is less about theocracy than it is about pin headed Progressive Proffessors trying to push their corrupt and destructive ideologies on a captive and very influential audience.

I think that particular Proffessor was active in the Obama worship that now defines the Democrat Party.
 
head of joaquin said:
You seemed to be making things up at this point. Professor's can't 'ban' paying students from a class they are enrolled in. If a professor claims the student is disruptive, he's have to put in a complaint to have him disciplined, including -- mirabile dictu -- a suspension. But professors don't have any such authority. At least not in any college I know about. So the story is garbled.

Where do you get your information -- Breitbart.com?
Click to expand...

See my post #127. Professors do indeed have the authority, depending on the institution's civility code, to kick a student who violates the civility code out of class. They don't have to file a complaint; they can simply order the student to exit the classroom, and if the student refuses, call the campus police. Further, if the student refuses to meet or no resolution is reached, this does become a ban from the class.
 
Fenton said:
If that was the case why did the " University" issue an apology ? .
Click to expand...

I don't know. The story is garbled. But it appears the professor and student got in an altercation and professors are held to higher standards than insecure fundie college kids.
 
nota bene said:
See my post #127. Professors do indeed have the authority, depending on the institution's civility code, to kick a student who violates the civility code out of class. They don't have to file a complaint; they can simply order the student to exit the classroom, and if the student refuses, call the campus police. Further, if the student refuses to meet or no resolution is reached, this does become a ban from the class.
Click to expand...

Ordering a student out of a classroom isn't a "ban". That requires a hearing. So the story is garbled.

Reading between the lines, I take it an altercation arose between the professor and student, and things got heated. Whose fault it was is hard to stay, but professors should keep their cool in general.
 
head of joaquin said:
Ordering a student out of a classroom isn't a "ban". That requires a hearing. So the story is garbled.
Click to expand...

Actually, as I have already explained, it is a de facto ban. It can be temporary or permanent. It does not necessarily require a "hearing" either although it does, as step 1, require a meeting with the prof. If the prof feels certain that there will be no successful resolution, he or she can request the department head to attend this meeting. The issue travels up from there.

You've already demonstrated that you aren't in possession of the facts. Stop trying to push this point; you are mistaken in your understanding.
 
longknife said:
I'm glad the scumbag non-tenured professor got slapped down. I'm also quite disappointed that only one student had the juevos to refuse.
Click to expand...
How do you know how many students refused to step on the paper? The point of the demonstration is that they refuse, to lead to a discussion as to why they did so.

Only one student reacted in such an extreme manner as to bring it to the attention of the University authorities and only one student took his side of the story to the press (in full knowledge that the University is legally prevented from right of reply). Even if his objection was legitimate, the manner in which it is raised is a relevant question.
 
head of joaquin said:
Ordering a student out of a classroom isn't a "ban". That requires a hearing. So the story is garbled.
Click to expand...

The story is pretty clear that the student was indeed barred from attending class until a meeting between himself and the teacher of the class, further the school served him with a notice of possible student ethics charges as well, so I don't know what is garbled about it for you....

Reading between the lines, I take it an altercation arose between the professor and student, and things got heated. Whose fault it was is hard to stay, but professors should keep their cool in general.
Click to expand...

I agree that both parties should have remained calm about the situation, and possibly the student could have just got up and exited the class at that point. We don't know how the situation exactly escalated, but the exercise could have been foreseen to have caused problems with students of faith, so I am surprised that any level headed teacher would attempt to make their point in that way.
 
j-mac said:
Don't you just love how the CBS station here takes the side of the University in the headline?

More.....





You have got to be kidding here....What the heck is going on in these classrooms of supposed "higher education"?



How typical. Marxist educrats playing semantic games with the story to deflect, and distort their reprehensible actions thus far....



wow, what a little Nazi authoritarian this educrat view themselves as....Let's see, Marxist teacher wants to make a point about their own beliefs in atheism, So he/she devises a participatory exercise in making people do something that some may find wrong, even shocking, and when confronted by a student that refuses to participate in that exercise, Marxist teacher goes after the dissenter in true Alinsky fashion....

I don't know why anyone pays for this **** anymore....

Thoughts....
Click to expand...

I'm thinking that there is a problem with your interpretation of what was going on here. A course on intercultural communications would be looking at the importance of cultural symbols. you need to look at the events in the classroom in that context. I also helps if you don't take one side of the story at face value, until you've heard the other side as well.

the University stated that

“We can confirm that no student has been expelled, suspended or disciplined by the university as a result of any activity that took place during this class,”

however it appears that there is an allegation of misconduct against the student:

"Rotela is facing a litany of charges – including an alleged violation of the student code of conduct, acts of verbal, written or physical abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, coercion or other conduct which threaten the health, safety or welfare of any person.”

“In the interim, you may not attend class or contact any of the students involved in this matter – verbally or electronically – or by any other means,”

so .... it doesn't appear he misbehaved in class (and I seriously doubt that he would have been "ordered" to stomp on the piece of paper), but at another - or other - times.

he may have argued that the class was the catalyst for his problematic behavior.

in general, when disciplinary action is taken against students in a university it is not done so lightly.

It seems that what you - and he - are doing is trying to justify unacceptable behavior on the part of a student.
 
HonestJoe said:
Having read about this elsewhere, I can point out that the lesson (as written in the text book at least) has nothing to do with atheism. The demonstration is about the power of words and symbols.

There are clearly not enough details public to make a definitive statement (nor should there be). In general, a student should be free to refuse to actually carry out the demonstration and shouldn't suffer in any way for that. Equally though, that refusal should be made calmly and reasonably. Given the reported code of conduct charges, there is an accusation that he crossed that line at some point in the sequence of events (meaning he hasn't been disciplined yet and may well not be at all). Exactly when, how, why and indeed if that happened isn't at all clear.

Jumping to conclusions, throwing out terms like Marxist and Nazi is totally inappropriate given the lack of information. Ironically, it's the kind of knee-jerk reaction that can lead to cases like this in the first place.

Incidentally, the CBS headline you quote reads like a straight statement of facts. Maybe you perceive bias in it because neutral headlines are such a rarity in the media.
Click to expand...

Fine, now explain why of all the symbols availble choose one that any thinking human would say "I think it best we not choose a religious figure for obvious reasons". Why not JFK or MLK or Obama?
 
rhinefire said:
Fine, now explain why of all the symbols availble choose one that any thinking human would say "I think it best we not choose a religious figure for obvious reasons". Why not JFK or MLK or Obama?
Click to expand...

I would hazard a guess that by using the name "jesus" as a symbol, it would be more likely to demonstrate to a greater number of students how powerful a word can be.

I also doubt the students were "ordered" to step on the paper.

It was more likely to get them to discuss how they felt about doing so, and to explore why they felt the way they did.

It would be a very worthwhile exercise in helping the students to understand how what they say can impact on others.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Obviously, the professor was wrong.

and now we have the anti education voices wanting to generalize his actions to the rest of the educational system. One idiot in the classroom makes the rest look bad, doesn't he?

In education, it is the 1% that makes the other 99% look bad. In politics, it is the 99% that makes that 1% look bad.
Click to expand...

I don't think she was wrong.

she may have expected her students to be more mature than this kid. that was her only mistake.
 
Fenton said:
If this lesson was truly about the power of a word then why wasn't the
word " Allah" or " Muhammed " ?

I wouldn't have done it either.
Click to expand...

because it would not demonstrate to THESE students how powerful a word is.
 
Cephus said:
The funniest thing is that if you read the instructions for the exercise, it says that most people will hesitate or refuse to step on the paper and this is an opening to discuss word biases in a social situation. The teacher and the university are both totally in the wrong on this one.
Click to expand...

why are they in the wrong?

are you yanks too stupid to understand that to engage in "intercultural communication" it is useful to understand how YOU react when people offend the things YOU regard as sacred?
 
dolphinocean said:
That isn't the effective way to demonstrate the power of words and symbols.

The best and proven way is to write the words "allah" and "mohammed" with arabic symbols and then tell the students to stomp it under their feet. I guarantee you heads will roll and properties will be burnt while humdreds and thousands of irrate muslims worldwide will come out in droves demanding for American bloods.

Heck, just burnt the quran or draw a cartoon of mohammed and see what will happen.
Click to expand...

but THESE students would not have learnt WHY those words have the power to cause a strong reaction.
 
joko104 said:
To try to make her absurd method point, she could have legally used "Obama" or "mother" to stomp on.

Requiring someone to stop on the name of a person God? And suspending the student for not doing so? Wow, if ever there was a lawsuit for violating separation of church and state - from the pro-religion side - that might be it. Using public funds to have people stomp on their God's name???

COULD YOU IMAGINE IF the teacher had instead had students write "Barack Hussein Obama" on the paper and then to stomp on it?

As for trying to show "the power of words" since only 1 student refused, the professor disproved her point. In addition, the professor - with the suspension - proved the only true power words have concerns punitive censorship by the powers that be.
Click to expand...

where does it say the student was suspended for not stomping on the word Jesus?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom