As much as I hate the Mississippi Rebels...

[Coach34]

it really bothers me that they are being made to change their mascot. The hypocracy of the Liberal agenda to rid our society of things like Rebels or anything associated with pre-Civil War Southern society is laughable. These same people will turn around and fight the Supreme Court to the death for a comic's right to say the most offensive thing possible to any group of people...or a Rapper's right to be offensive and call women any name they feel...

They work like hell to force St John's to change their mascot from Redmen, and then turn around and support a woman's right to choose...and then after fighting like hell to support a woman's right to choose, they all gather outside of a prison to protest against the death penalty for murderers of helpless people.


I just dont understand how America is so 17'ed up

 

[Coach34]

it really bothers me that they are being made to change their mascot. The hypocracy of the Liberal agenda to rid our society of things like Rebels or anything associated with pre-Civil War Southern society is laughable. These same people will turn around and fight the Supreme Court to the death for a comic's right to say the most offensive thing possible to any group of people...or a Rapper's right to be offensive and call women any name they feel...

They work like hell to force St John's to change their mascot from Redmen, and then turn around and support a woman's right to choose...and then after fighting like hell to support a woman's right to choose, they all gather outside of a prison to protest against the death penalty for murderers of helpless people.


I just dont understand how America is so 17'ed up

 

[boomboommsu]

I thought Ole Miss just finally decided the negative consequences of Col Reb were too much.

There's nothing hypocritical about boycotting something, but still oposing a governmental fiat against it.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

Why is it so 17ing hard for Republicans/conservatives to understand that political posts are against the rules!?!?<div>
</div><div>I for one would love to discuss politics with you ignorant bunch of dubmasses, but I, along with the rest of the liberals here, can respect the no-politics rule. After all, we're all Bulldogs and that's what counts here. Why can't conservatives do the same?</div>

 

[rugbdawg]

flags at games, they are simply cleaning up their image. Smart move.

 

[Coach34]

or force issues on this by not allowing certain sites to host games or regionals???? Seems like this has been an issue before....

 

[Sutterkane]

I'd say most people on the board are conservative. Take up abortion, marijuana legalization, illegal immigration amnesty, and gun control if you want more votes.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

Universally agreed upon by conservatives AND liberals. Stop dragging your ignorant politics into this.

 

[DirtyLopez]

this is another scheme they have hatched to improve recruiting.

 

[fishwater99]

The NCAA can do what they want.. They are above the law.

 

[mstateglfr]

<span class="post-title">Who's forcing anything?</span>

Well the NCAA has forced schools to change their mascot/name for years now.

But from what i understand, the OM students voted to get rid of that quaint dispaly of passive racism known as Col Reb.
So you are correct here, nobody is really forcing anything. The voted to change the mascot, they werent forced.

 

[rebelrouseri]

I must have missed that.

 

[TallE]

Hey coach if you think America is so 17'ed up I'm pretty sure the majority of the people of this board wouldn't mind if you moved to Pakistan or any place without internet access.

 

[UpTheMiddlex3Punt]

[No message]

 

[biguglyjoe]

Lock it.

 

[boomboommsu]

but according to our Supreme Court, membership in the NCAA is voluntary. i disagree, and hope the court looks back on the issue soon, as when they made that decision there were viable alternatives to the NCAA that don't exist now (NIT being one). several eligibility issues hinge on this argument. The recent NFL ruling is a step in the right direction.

What about the NCAA's rights? If Ole Miss decided to call themselves the "Ole Miss N----- Haters", shouldn't the NCAA have the right to kick them out rather than be associated with that?

 

[boomboommsu]

nm

 

[rugbdawg]

in favor of a law school in California.

Essentially, in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court said that a state law school can deny funding/recognition to a Christian student group which requires its members to take an oath saying homosexuality and extramarital sex is wrong.

That is the bastardization of the free speech clause/twisted establishment clause that we all have grown accustom to.

 

[markymark.sixpack]

for you idiots to understand that liberal/socialist/communist policies always fail. but you're willing to keep trying them for the rest of time. just keep ignoring what the past 2500 years have taught us.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

I love the handgun one, and I have no problem not giving taxpayer money to any group that discriminates. Same goes for an atheist group that would make members swear to not believe in god. They still have free speech, just not paid for. If they were to be officially recognized, they would receive funding. It isn't just that the group has those views, it's that no one is allowed to actually become a member without signing an oath affirming those views.

 

[J-Dawg]

Oh, look, ignorant dubmasses... I didn't expect to see that one from a lib.

 

[boomboommsu]

dammit yuku, quit losing posts........

I have reservations on both. I think banning a type of gun, while allowing plenty of alternatives for home defense and hunting etc, is in keeping with the 2nd Amendment. If a local authority decides that banning handguns (because they are disproportionally used there for commiting crime not preventing crime) then they should have that autonomy. Though the same effect can mostly be achieved thru regulation, which i think is the court's thinking and preference.

On the speech one, I think that is dangerously close to state-sanctioned speech. Ifa group has multiple members that believe the same thing, then why should that opinion be less protected than other opinions. I think the school should have the option of funding all speech or no speech. If they are so concerned or offended with one group's views that they don't want to fund, then they can defund all groups.

 

[benatmsu]

If Ole Miss decided to call themselves the "Ole Miss N----- Haters", shouldn't the NCAA have the right to kick them out rather than be associated with that?

Wait... you mean they don't?

 

[biguglyjoe]

******

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

just the idea that you can't be allowed in the group without that view. A group could espouse the exact same views, but to be officially recognized (and funded) they must be open to all people.

Though as you say, I'd be fine just cutting funding to all of them.

 

[rugbdawg]

organization's position in the case. Pretty ballsy move by them...considering they were supporting someone who doesn't approve of their lifestyle. Of course, there were other gay groups against the Christians.

The reason they opposed is because they saw through the distinction that you are drawing which is what was argued by the law school. That's not what it is really about...and if it were, it's a terrible, terrible ruling for free speech and free association rights on public campus. It would force a gay group to accept one of those crazies from that Baptist church that has been protesting gays at military funerals. It would force an NAACP group to accept a Neo-Nazi into their group. It would force a Christian group to accept an Atheist into their groups. For a smaller group, you could have a block of outsiders simply come in, elect themselves to power, and disband the group. In other words, by requiring groups to allow everyone in, you are potentially eliminating everyone's free speech rights.

There should be two choices. Either you allow equal access and funding to all OR you eliminate all funding to groups like that. You shouldn't be able to cut funding to a group because the group is discriminating in its membership requirements. In my view, and obviously those of the conservative/constitutional justices, that's content based discrimination by the state.

Edited to add: Obviously, this is a hotly contested issue right now and ruling for either side has its advantages and disadvantages. There are obvious conterarguments. But the bottom line in my opinion is this. I'm find with the "PC" society created by the liberal media. By all means, that is their right to report however they like. But, I don't want to live in a world where we have a state sanctioned "PC" society...where the state effectively eliminates controversial speech or even hate speech by only funding groups and ideas that are "PC" and worthy of financial support.

 

[Optimus Prime 4]

they should apply the decision to all groups equally. The GLBA shouldn't be allowed to keep people from joining either.

 

[RonnyAtmosphere]

...actually, I'm nowa liberal for life after watching America being ruined by8 years of George W. Bush & his criminal cabal.

Moreover, if somebody told me coach34 on the sixpackspeak.com board was a conservative, I would instantly become a liberal on the spot just out of general principle.

But to address the issue at hand, hate to tell you, but no liberal in America gives a **** what the mascot @ Ole Miss is.

And you don't give a **** either; you just cherry pick a politically incorrect issue & raise hell about it because that's the way you realize it works in right wing nutso land.

I suppose it could be considered an act of common decency todrop the old Ole Miss mascot since he represented human slave trading & legal lynching. But I realize white conservatives always feel like they are being framed the victim in these instances, hence the fact it is an act of common decency to drop the old Ole Miss mascot has nothing to do with it.

 

[was21]

cowbell as well. That's the most obnoxious noise other than venezuzus or whatever in hell they've been blowing on at soccer games.

 

[Shmuley]

If you hurry, you might be able to convince them they need hope and change.