Reply With Quote
Did I say anything about me getting a coffee? No. Did I say people should not be allowed to have the freedom of speech? No. Just don't get the freakin way when I'm going to class. Is that so hard?
Uh, planning ahead for every rally and protest takes time. Sueing those same people would take even more time and TONS of money!!! Why should protests or displays like this be allowed in a place that is designed to be a place of learning?!! Why? I know they want to reach people, but the people that are there do not spend their time and money to hear a bunch of causes. I didn't go to school to hear people's causes. I went there to get an education. And not that hearing these people isn't educational, it's just not part of the requirements to graduate., no no, you're confusing your right to an education which wasn't obstructed, to your right to have everything just the way you want it with no disturbances, which isn't actually real.
It's a shame it was a nuisance, but that hardly kept you from getting an education. It obviously didn't bother you to the point you'd take time to do something about it, other than . (you could have done the former in the time it took you to do the latter)
I don't care about protests that are in areas that don't effect me getting to classes or school. I just don't think that it is fair that just because you want to be heard, you make it difficult for others who are trying to get around on their daily business.
Did I say anything about me getting a coffee? No. Did I say people should not be allowed to have the freedom of speech? No. Just don't get the freakin way when I'm going to class. Is that so hard?
Well, this thread speaks for itself, there's not left for me to add.
As long as you're not suggesting these groups be banned from the campus, you have every right to want them to shut up. So long as you're not condoning "shutting" them up. Therein lies the difference.Did I say anything about me getting a coffee? No. Did I say people should not be allowed to have the freedom of speech? No. Just don't get the freakin way when I'm going to class. Is that so hard?
not even close... the death penalty is to rid society of murderers and rapists or other criminals...
I'm not saying they should be shut up. But there have been times in the past that certain groups have made it difficult to get from one place to another. I'm not saying the messages shouldn't be heard, but a campus is not the best place for a human traffic jam.
But do you acknowledge their right to be there?
Are you saying they have a right to interfere with my education?
If free speech and peaceful assmbly on public grounds interferes with your education, then yes.
They didn't interfere with your education in anyway.
In any way some groups have interfered. I have been taking more net classes though so it's not a big deal to me now. At Sac it was always the credit card sign up tables or the jewelry sales. Manny, would it be wrong to keep these things off the common sidewalk areas?
THey never interefred with my education, and I think you'd have to ing reach so hard you'd pull every arm muscle you have to find out if they had.
Personally, I don't like the credit card tables there, and I don't know how they get there. The jewelry ones don't bother me as much, but I don't care.
Either way, I think comercial endeavours are not even close to being the same thing as a protest, which is a pure expression of first amendment rights.
My friend Joel's dad is one of them that owns a jewelry booth that sets up at sac (and TSU), Joel usually works that one. If you are down there it is the "avalon jewelry" one. He is pretty cool to talk to.
Yes Manny, you are right because you say so. I can't even be right about my own personal experiences.
if they were disrupting classrooms, that would be a valid point. otherwise, spare the dramatics.
"i can't learn.....those big bad pictures are in the parking lot"
i mean really....c'mon...
I'm not saying that the case that started this thread is the same as the instances I'm talking about. I am refering not to what is on these displays, but to the delays and other effects that come to having them smack in the middle of the campus. I don't spend my money and my time to have to figure out away around these types of things. They shouldn't be there. Some people may like to have to walk around and through crowds of people. They may like to have to go around the outside of buildings or around barracades to get to where they are going. I don't.
P.S. And they better not be on the ing parking lot either. Parking is already at such a premium as it is to waste space like that.
no, if they had been in the parking lot people would've ran them over...there would have been real drama!
there were in the middle of the campus on the sidewalk...
well guys, i understand your points, you are paying for an education and if you feel it interfered with your education unfairly, then so be it. does UTSA make a habit out of having these things? not anti-abortion stuff, just big displays in general? because either it was a one time thing and really shouldn't be made such a big deal about, or it's a repetative thing, and the university really needs to listen to it's student body with regards to complaints such as yours....Good luck.
A case of a similar point. Target stops the Salvation Army from bell ringing in front of it's stores. Target would be have to open to having anyone from any charity stand in front of it's stores and that would be an inconvenience to it's customers and possibly a safety hazzard.
Target would be have to open to having anyone from any charity stand in front of it's stores
really? why's that? i don't ususally see any one other than salvation army in front of walmart of dillards during the holidays....and why a safety hazard? you mean like if there's a fire? i'm sure santa will get his pot and run too....
Target had to stop allowing them to collect because then it would have to allow everyone to collect. If everyone wanted to camp outside it could get very crowded.
I'm not familliar with the Target situation, but it seems to me that Target would be able to allow anyone they wish and disallow anyone they wish from using the grounds seeing as it is a private en y.
Also, the public grounds, including those of a publcly funded university must be open for all equaly to express their first amendment rights. There's nothing new or complicated about this.
There is a difference between a vendor and a protestor, and I don't know what the qualifications are for a vendor to set up shop, but they are not allowed the same protections as protestors because they are not the same thing.
but yeah, for a while target only allowed the salvation army..then they stopped saying, if they let target, they'd have to let everyone.... the salvation army lost a considerable percentage of their christmas funding bc of this decision by target.
Hey, you can be rightin your mind, and I can be right in mine. What matters is who's opinion the court is going to enforce, and I suspect that it's going to follow the first amdendment and do what it can to make sure those rights are protected.
I don't see anywhere you would have a legal arguement that your rights were breeched by an exhibit in the middle of campus.
I'm having a hard time understanding what you are saying in that post, but I think I know what you mean.
The question is, was Target forced to make this decision based upon a judgement, or was it an internal decision because thats what they deemed to be correct?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions