• 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!

Univ. of Oklahoma severs ties with frat after racist chant

Your lean says the same thing it did in your first post in here - "Slightly Conservative".

Centrist?

There isn't a "Republican" lean. I'm not conservative, I'm actually more liberal, however, I'm a Republican. So my views sometimes line up with the cons.
 
I thought it was funny how people who didn't join a fraternity or sorority at your school was characterized as nerdy, odd, or hockey player.

I never said they were "characterized". I said they were the people who didn't pledge. That was their choice. And hockey players weren't "characterized" as hockey players - it's what they were.

Next time please ask me what my post means before you attempt to use it in a disparaging way.
 
There isn't a "Republican" lean. I'm not conservative, I'm actually more liberal, however, I'm a Republican. So my views sometimes line up with the cons.

Oh I know that. I'm just amazed that he saw "Centrist" instead of what it actually says.
 
Oh I know that. I'm just amazed that he saw "Centrist" instead of what it actually says.

I've grown to just get used to the fact that he has a very wild imagination.
 
I never said they were "characterized". I said they were the people who didn't pledge. That was their choice. And hockey players weren't "characterized" as hockey players - it's what they were.

Next time please ask me what my post means before you attempt to use it in a disparaging way.

No you did not just say they were people who didn't pledge, you specifically called them names in a disparaging way:

Animal House came out in 1978, two years before I entered college. I have to admit, when I saw it I was like WTF, is all of that true? It was, in a lot of ways. I was in the Greek system at my college - Greeks were huge. The only people who didn't pledge were either nerdy, odd, or hockey players (they weren't allowed to). I went to a private university.

How is that not a characterization of people who didn't pledge?? Or are the people who did not pledge in fact "odd" or "nerdy"?

"Direct Characterization tells the audience what the personality of the character is."

You tell us people who did not pledge were odd or nerdy, is that the absolute truth or just your idea or characterization of them? Just stand up and say that's how you thought of them, perhaps not exactly how they truly were.
 
Last edited:
No you did not just say they were people who didn't pledge, you specifically called them names in a disparaging way:



How is that not a characterization of people who didn't pledge?? Or are the people who did not pledge in fact "odd" or "nerdy"?

"Direct Characterization tells the audience what the personality of the character is."

You tell us people who did not pledge were odd or nerdy, is that the absolute truth or just your idea or characterization of them? Just stand up and say that's how you thought of them, perhaps not exactly how they truly were.


Excuse me. I said they were the people who didn't pledge. You just repeated that.

Is nerdy a bad word now? Is odd a bad word now? You're asking me to defend why I referred to people as nerdy or odd? Are you ****ing kidding me?

If you want to know the definition of nerdy or the definition of odd, look them up.
 
Spend some time in Alabama and figure it out for yourself. :roll:

BTW: Alabama is known as the heart of Dixie.

Sorry, I can't spend time in Alabama in 1856, so knowing what it was like 150 years ago when the fraternity was founded isn't going to happen.

And once again, what do people who live in Alabama today have anything to do with the SAE fraternity?
 
What it says. They and their families are now getting death threats. What other good thing came out of their names being made public?

I guess I don't think Free Speech is good because it brings those who exercise their rights out in the open. I look at it as being good because it's far better than having no right to speak or think, and having the government tell us what to think or speak.

I've already responded to that question. Let's review. You said:

You said you're glad they're in the open. Why? The only thing that came out of them being in the open are death threats.

To which I responded:

That's not true - they're being held publicly accountable. And one of them has published a very thoughtful public apology which is probably a necessary first step for him to eventually move on from this incident.

You said:

Huh? That's exactly what I said earlier.

I said I was confused, which I still am, and you ask this:

What it says. They and their families are now getting death threats. What other good thing came out of their names being made public?

I guess I don't think Free Speech is good because it brings those who exercise their rights out in the open. I look at it as being good because it's far better than having no right to speak or think, and having the government tell us what to think or speak.

But I responded to that point DIRECTLY earlier. So do you expect a different answer the second time you ask that question?

As to the rest, them being public has really nothing to do with 'free speech' - it's a different issue, one of being held accountable for speech. I think that's a good thing. If you want to spew racist chants, then having your real name and face attached to that speech is a good thing. I don't see any virtue in e.g. our online communities that give anonymity to racists and haters of any stripe. It encourages those who spew hatred on a daily basis to do more of it because anonymity allows them to do so without suffering any accountability for it. It's just another form of the KKK white sheets that allowed those idiots to hide their faces from the public. In my view, if you want to spew that garbage, show your face and own your hatred. If you're not willing to put your name to it, then keep your trap shut.

BTW, death threats are always condemnable, and should if remotely credible be prosecuted. But again, most of those making death threats are too chickenshiate to attach their real names to those threats, which is why anonymity isn't actually a good thing in a lot of cases at least. But for those that do, out them, prosecute them, put a heavy price on threatening others. It's how to end that BS - not by allowing them to do so behind some veil of secrecy.
 
What does my "lean say"? Sure doesn't say what yours does, "liberal extremist".

Trying to avoid the point of my post so you can focus on the minutia? Typical of centrists. Wait, can you show us a SINGLE fraternity with as racist a history as SAE? :) I'm still waiting for you to show us that all organizations engage in the same type of activity. I bet you can't.
 
I've already responded to that question. Let's review. You said:



To which I responded:



You said:



I said I was confused, which I still am, and you ask this:



But I responded to that point DIRECTLY earlier. So do you expect a different answer the second time you ask that question?

As to the rest, them being public has really nothing to do with 'free speech' - it's a different issue, one of being held accountable for speech. I think that's a good thing. If you want to spew racist chants, then having your real name and face attached to that speech is a good thing. I don't see any virtue in e.g. our online communities that give anonymity to racists and haters of any stripe. It encourages those who spew hatred on a daily basis to do more of it because anonymity allows them to do so without suffering any accountability for it. It's just another form of the KKK white sheets that allowed those idiots to hide their faces from the public. In my view, if you want to spew that garbage, show your face and own your hatred. If you're not willing to put your name to it, then keep your trap shut.

BTW, death threats are always condemnable, and should if remotely credible be prosecuted. But again, most of those making death threats are too chickenshiate to attach their real names to those threats, which is why anonymity isn't actually a good thing in a lot of cases at least. But for those that do, out them, prosecute them, put a heavy price on threatening others. It's how to end that BS - not by allowing them to do so behind some veil of secrecy.

Okay, so the good you see that came out of it is that they're being held "publicly accountable". Got it. The court of public opinion is now able to try them. Sorry, that isn't something I subscribe to. And I already said people need to own their words. I said it in a post to Zinthaniel. You're repeating what I said.

Do you believe the people who spew hatred on this board should lose their anonymity, by the way?
 
Excuse me. I said they were the people who didn't pledge. You just repeated that.

Is nerdy a bad word now? Is odd a bad word now? You're asking me to defend why I referred to people as nerdy or odd? Are you ****ing kidding me?

If you want to know the definition of nerdy or the definition of odd, look them up.

:lol:



I already know what nerdy and odd mean and I doubt the people who didn't pledge had those characteristics you assigned to them. You don't need to defend, you are already getting quite defensive that I pointed out how you characterized people who didn't pledge.
 
Last edited:
I've grown to just get used to the fact that he has a very wild imagination.

So, when you add up all of my views and slap 'em on the Political Tests online, I come out as a Centrist.

I fit more liberal talking points than Conservative, however I'm more Republican than Democrat.

Now it's your turn :)

We know, we know. :)
 
:lol:



I already know what nerdy and odd mean and I doubt the people who didn't pledge had those characteristics you assigned to them. You don't need to defend, you are already getting quite defensive that I pointed out how you characterized people who didn't pledge.

It has nothing to do with the topic, and you used my post to Haymarket in an effort to disparage me while having fun with Hatuey. I'm not stupid.
 
You used his post in another thread to slam him here. Holy ****, how desperate.

There's nothing desperate. I called out his claim that I'm an "extremist liberal" for showing evidence that this fraternity has a racist history. I even challenged him to show another fraternity with a similar history. He couldn't. Then I laughed at him pretending to be a centrist a few months ago and then changing his lean after I called him on it. He focused on the outrage of being called what he himself said he was just a few months ago. Now, as for you, I'm still waiting for that evidence that the black member was talking about SAE national. I asked for the specific sentence where he mentioned SAE national. Or are you going to ignore that too like you did all the other incidents?
 
Last edited:
It has nothing to do with the topic, and you used my post to Haymarket in an effort to disparage me while having fun with Hatuey. I'm not stupid.

Hey I just quoted a post you made in this thread, if you went off topic first with your ideas about the kind of people who didn't pledge at your college, I am only guilty of responding to an off topic post.
 
:lol:

I already know what nerdy and odd mean and I doubt the people who didn't pledge had those characteristics you assigned to them. You don't need to defend, you are already getting quite defensive that I pointed out how you characterized people who didn't pledge.

Lol, she doesn't know that not everyone cares about social clubs. If you don't pledge or care, you're nerdy or black balled or... a hockey player? That makes... what is it? Millions of people who go to university and don't join a fraternity nerdy or hockey players.
 
Ones education should not be at stake for being a racist, racists pay taxes too to support the university system, besides if they'd been chanting slurs against white people the Univ would've done zero about it.

Let Me ask you a question. Would your job be at risk if you went into the break room chanting offensive racist slurs? Think they might fire you for not adhering to a code of conduct of sorts?
 
There's nothing desperate. I called out his claim that I'm an "extremist liberal" for showing evidence that this fraternity has a racist history. I even challenged him to show another fraternity with a similar history. He couldn't. Then I laughed at him pretending to be a centrist a few months ago and then changing his lean after I called him on it. He focused on the outrage of being called what he himself said he was just a few months ago. Now, as you, I'm still waiting for that evidence that the black member was talking about SAE national. I asked for the specific sentence where he mentioned SAE national. Or are you going to ignore that too like you did all the other incidents?

He doesn't have to show "another fraternity with a similar history" because it has nothing - zero - to do with your claim that SAE as a national organization "promotes racism", when there is no evidence - zero - to support that. Even former brothers who are black have come out and said the opposite. And there are black SAE members all over this country who would have known about it or said something about it if their national organization was doing it.

And the black brothers have said that it was NOT THE CULTURE OR WAY OF THINKING WHEN THEY WERE BROTHERS THERE. So you can deny it, or pretend it, or continue to post lies about it, but the reality is, you are the only person I have seen say that they are "promoting racism". So if you believe that the national chapter in fact promotes racism, it would have had to start doing it after the black brothers left Oklahoma, and that would mean you would have to tie the change to the specific staff whose names I posted repeatedly yesterday. But you can't. Because you have no proof. You just think it's the case.

And who the hell remembers a lean someone had months ago? I changed my lean twice in the last 2 months. What were they? Or do you only obsess about his lean that he said months ago?
 
Lol, she doesn't know that not everyone cares about social clubs. If you don't pledge or care, you're nerdy or black balled or... a hockey player? That makes... what is it? Millions of people who go to university and don't join a fraternity nerdy or hockey players.

Another idiotic post about my earlier post to Haymarket. Another stupid post from someone who obviously didn't read that I was talking about my college, not other colleges, even though the post was clear that it was my college, not any other college. Unbelievable levels of stupidity abound in this thread. Thanks for doubling down on the efforts to reduce my IQ with stupid posts I have to read and respond to.
 
He doesn't have to show "another fraternity with a similar history" because it has nothing - zero - to do with your claim that SAE as a national organization "promotes racism"

He claimed that this happens across the board. I want evidence. I don't want a single incident in a single chapter in a single state. I want detailed history of similar cases with other organizations. I can do it with SAE. Can you do it with another group?

And the black brothers have said that it was NOT THE CULTURE OR WAY OF THINKING WHEN THEY WERE BROTHERS THERE. So you can deny it, or pretend it, or continue to post lies about it, but the reality is, you are the only person I have seen say that they are "promoting racism". So if you believe that the national chapter in fact promotes racism, it would have had to start doing it after the black brothers left Oklahoma, and that would mean you would have to tie the change to the specific staff whose names I posted repeatedly yesterday. But you can't. Because you have no proof. You just think it's the case.

Can you or can you not show where he was discussing the national organization like you claimed? I can wait.

And who the hell remembers a lean someone had months ago? I changed my lean twice in the last 2 months. What were they? Or do you only obsess about his lean that he said months ago?

Nope, not obsessing. I just remember his refusal to show any posts where his "centrist" positions came out. :shrug:
 
Another idiotic post about my earlier post to Haymarket. Another stupid post from someone who obviously didn't read that I was talking about my college, not other colleges, even though the post was clear that it was my college, not any other college. Unbelievable levels of stupidity abound in this thread. Thanks for doubling down on the efforts to reduce my IQ with stupid posts I have to read and respond to.

You stated that people who didn't pledge were nerdy or hockey players. We're chuckling at the absurdity of your words/suggestion.
 
Back
Top Bottom