Based on those two articles (the first of which reads like news, the second of which reads like nonsense), I'd say the teacher was out of line in what he said to the student. Calling a student a "fascist bastard" in class and making various remarks against his faith is just plain wrong and he should be punished for that.
But I can't comment on whether the student's speech was out of line, because there were no quotes from the offending speech. I don't think the student should be given a free pass just because his speech was based on religious beliefs. If it was offensive, then he should be punished for it.
So, one party is definitely in the wrong. The other party may be in the wrong, but there's not enough information to say.
It may surprise you to know that I pretty much agree with your whole statement. The teacher was definitely out of line, pretty much no matter what the student was saying. He could have been up there spouting KKK propaganda - the teacher reacted in a childish and unprofessional manner
( ... )
See, this is why I say I'd need to see the actual speech to make an informed opinion. I agree that a purely informative speech about one's faith is not unreasonable. And even comments on his support for Prop 8 are fine. But it's the language used that becomes the issue. Did he speak about these things in an informative manner, or was it hate speech? I don't know, because there are no quotes from it.
Yeah, I agree. Though, I gotta think that even if we had the speech text, it wouldn't be cut and dried. My definition of "hate speech" is likely different than yours.
For example, I would think saying something in a speech like "gays are going to hell" would be a bad move and a pretty stupid thing to say. But would it constitute hate speech? It'd be a poorly constructed, poorly worded, and offensive way to express a belief that you may have, but I think free speech covers offensive speech - it has to. That's what free speech is.
So yeah, while I'd like to see the text of the speech, unless it was really extreme one way or the other (purely innocent or extremely offensive), it'd probably wouldn't clear anything up.
Sounds like Professor Matteson was out of line, and he should have known better. I wonder if Mr. Lopez's speech was any good. It was only a 6 to 8 minute assignment, and two other students complained to the dean. I support Mr. Lopez's right to his opinion, but now I kinda sorta want to see the text of his speech. I'm not sure I wouldn't have walked out before the 8 minute mark.
See above. I'd like to see the speech text too, but no matter what it was, I think the Prof was out of line. There are better ways to react, man. Be a bigger person.
Comments 19
But I can't comment on whether the student's speech was out of line, because there were no quotes from the offending speech. I don't think the student should be given a free pass just because his speech was based on religious beliefs. If it was offensive, then he should be punished for it.
So, one party is definitely in the wrong. The other party may be in the wrong, but there's not enough information to say.
Reply
Reply
Reply
For example, I would think saying something in a speech like "gays are going to hell" would be a bad move and a pretty stupid thing to say. But would it constitute hate speech? It'd be a poorly constructed, poorly worded, and offensive way to express a belief that you may have, but I think free speech covers offensive speech - it has to. That's what free speech is.
So yeah, while I'd like to see the text of the speech, unless it was really extreme one way or the other (purely innocent or extremely offensive), it'd probably wouldn't clear anything up.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment