Any time someone cites pbs as a source shows they've lost the argument....again.And they set new precedents over time, but until they did, the laws were what they were. They never ruled differently on the unborn child thing, they just allowed states to decide under the 10th amendment.
By Congress, they inferred government. A basic civics course would do you wonders.
UK is governed by congress, as is everyone and every business in the US. They are your government and law-making body. UK, as a publicly funded university, is bound by those laws. Which is what the courts have long upheld. Again, feel free to show us case law if you feel it's different.
Lol, I am doing pretty well I think. UK cannot limit speech, as was ruled in Tinker v. Des Moines.
Do student athletes have a right to "take a knee?"
The NFL famously banned “taking a knee” during the national anthem, but what about student athletes? First Amendment attorney Lee Rowland of the ACLU explores whether taking a knee is protected speech and shines some light on the free speech rights of public school students. Lee Rowland...www.talksonlaw.com
the McLellan: Can students get in trouble for kneeling during ...
mclellan.law.msu.edu
Can schools punish students for protesting the national anthem?
National-anthem protests have spread beyond the NFL and onto the sidelines at high school athletic events. Education Week offers a primer on how schools should respond.www.pbs.org
Happily awaiting any evidence you have to the contrary. 😉
I’m choosing to support Cal, and here’s why
- Thread starter Wonky
- Start date
And they kneeled right after the insurrection.
I don’t agree with their kneeling but I understand it.
He had his scholarship offer revoked. Schools can revoke a scholarship for many reasons. That doesn't impact his ability to speak freely. How did the school prevent him from saying what he wanted? He wasn't yet a student or member of the school. They owed him no duty.
Anyone calling to overthrow the government is illegal. No one ever claimed all speech was free.
As for the confederate flag issue. That was ruled on in Melton v Young in 1972. If it's viewed as a potential disruption to the learning environment or safety from potential racial issues or violence, it is reasonable to ban the attire. Not sure how a sporting event would be equated to a learning environment.
That’s kind of my point. What if Cal’s tenure looked like this:
Final four 2012
Title 2016
Runner up 2019
Final four 2022
Do you think fans would be calling for his head right now? I don’t. And I totally get that we’re on a very bad trajectory and have been for some time. I’m just saying… it’s like Cal gets no credit for UNBELIEVABLY OVERACHIEVING in his first 5 seasons, because he has unbelievably underachieved since then. It’s almost like people view those first 5 years as what’s expected. And given historical context that is simply not true.
I don't understand it at all.
The players at a university are some of the most privileged people on the planet. Meals are paid for. Tuition is paid for. If they get hurt they get the best medical care available. They are practically treated like gods on campus.
They are given the benefit of the doubt...especially if they can get a team 20 and 10 on game night. See Alabama as an example.
They live in the freest country on the planet.
If everyone followed Chris Rock's advice we would a whole lot fewer of these episdoes like Floyd. But if Floyd had
been following the law we'd never heard of him.
Looks like you missed the last sentence.
While those contracts probably aren’t enough to overpower your First Amendment rights, they might cause a problem for student athletes who want to participate in a protest.
What does supporting or not supporting cal even mean? As fans we offer no financial support of his salary or have any input on his position on whether he stays or goes. We can only vent to our family/friends/or on here. Regardless of “support” cal is going to continue with his shitty coaching style with todays game as it’s all he knows.
Notice the word....probably. Reading is fundamental....so is comprehension.
So, then you should be able to support this conclusion with case law or some precedent, right? But, yet, the cases all agree with me....
My biggest gripe with Cal is how he treats the fans. While he was winning I didn't care but the combination of losing and being a jerk to fans while doing so irks me.
I've already shown several examples of how schools limit free speech....or can you not read and understand?
You can support Cal, but Cal doesn't support this program. If he did he wouldn't put drafting players over winning in March. He's in fact hurt this program many times by putting players first over the success of the program which is why UK is in the down ward slide it is in at the moment.
I absolutely can say or do whatever I want at my place of work.
The real question is whether I'd need to pack my things afterward.
What if Cal had been here 30 years with the first 22 just outstanding and the last 8 absolutely terrible? His historical standard comparison would still look good. At some point, you need to step in and get us back on track. Cal shows no evidence of turning this back to the standards that UK should be at. Plus, he's hurt a lot of other traditions and aspects of the program that aren't reflected in just wins and losses.
You say he has not run the program into the ground, but he's on his way there for sure. You don't wait until it hits rock bottom - which at times in the last few years it has felt that way - to make a change.
"If it's viewed as a potential disruption to the learning environment or safety from potential racial issues or violence, it is reasonable to ban the attire. Not sure how a sporting event would be equated to a learning environment."
Same thought process applies to kneeling. It's disruptive to the environment.
"No one ever claimed all speech was free." Now you're starting to get the idea.
Seems some speech is more protected than others.
If we had lost at Florida, which we almost managed to do despite a huge advantage, I doubt I would have seen such a post. When we win, Cal is great, When we lose, he needs to go.
I only have my belief which is not fact, but I believe Cal will be here for next year and it will be his last. He has high level recruits and wants to go out a winner. I don't feel confident that next year will be a National Championship type team because even with Zion and a very talented Duke team, depending upon Freshman is dicey to say the least. But, the team should be good. So, whether I support Cal or not; or you support Cal or not doesn't matter.
I only have my belief which is not fact, but I believe Cal will be here for next year and it will be his last. He has high level recruits and wants to go out a winner. I don't feel confident that next year will be a National Championship type team because even with Zion and a very talented Duke team, depending upon Freshman is dicey to say the least. But, the team should be good. So, whether I support Cal or not; or you support Cal or not doesn't matter.
Well I certainly respect your right to your opinion, and I will never denigrate you for it but, I just don't see things the same way. My only comment and observation of Calipari, if you look at his past, after the bloom is off the rose, he always has more detractors professionally than supporters. Refs can't stand the guy ... for a reason. When he gets criticized, he lashes out. You may not agree but IMO, he's thrown the State, University, Program, and the fanbase under the bus. He's hellbent on his deluded "higher mission" that is killing this Program. He trusts his wagging tongue to rationalize and explain away his antics. He's unfit for this job today. At this point, virtually anyone remotely qualified would be better. The program is bigger than Calipari but no one could ever convince him of that fact. All of his undoing has come from his rogue and deluded decisions. When he arrived, he stood in front of all of us and declared UK to be the gold standard. I haven't heard him mention gold standard for some time. Weird isn't it?
I respect your position Wonky , more than once I've cursed Cal and he puts together a few impressive W's , and I think " hes capable of turning this around " but the past 3 years I've totally lost confidence in him . Hes got to go ASAP .
Not at all. How does kneeling at a sporting event (entertainment) disrupt a learning environment?
Where didn't I have the idea before? Did I ever claim all speech was free? Did I say threats were free speech? Enticing violence or harm? Harassment? Panic?
What free speech was this person guaranteed? Rupp, while owned by an arm of LFUCG, is operated by a private company. They get to make their own rules for what they allow and don't. It was also directed at 1 specific actor in Cal, which can be seen as harassment. I wouldn't have removed him as I felt he was harmless, but RUPP Arena has that right. He also was a paying customer and had a reasonable expectation when purchasing the ticket and agreeing to those rules, that he could be removed for a reasons left up to Rupp Arena. That is a far cry from an employee or student of a public university.
Man, you're dense.
Same argument for kicking out the fan can be applied to the kneeling issue.
But if the school allows kneeling, which is disruptive as this discussion illustrates, then the school has to allow the sign.
Respect yours too and you may well be right. I definitely wouldn’t say I have much confidence in him at this point.
Kneeling during the propaganda song could not be further from sexually harassing cheerleaders.
I’m a fairly patriotic guy and love the idea’s that America represent, but I do not understand for the life of me the near sexual fetishizing of a damn song written 300 years ago. Over the top Nationalism is so damn weird to me, especially coming from supposedly “small government” conservatives.
A sign calling for a coach to be removed is now harassment??
Comical.
Whatever you do in life I hope it's better than what you've shown on this thread.
"Kneeling during the propaganda song....."
Thanks obama for your post.
Wonder how you feel about My Ol Kentucky Home??
A song celebrating the land of the free is propaganda?
The song is about people revolting against a tyrannical government when it got too big for its britches. So your last sentence makes zero sense.
Furthermore, let’s not politicize this thread please, lest it be moved to the paddock. I’m imploring everyone doing it, not just you personally. This thread is about Cal’s results on the court.
If you say so, but I have been the only of us to actually present case law and facts. So, whatever you need to tell yourself, go for it! You clearly make up your own version of the constitution and its interpretation. Why bother with facts, right? 🤣
How can is be applied the same? Fans aren't offered the same protections as students and employees. Particularly at privately operated venues.
How is kneeling at a basketball game before it's even started disruption? How does the kneeling target one specific individual?
Yes, it is targeted at 1 individual. That is what harassment is.
You mean someone who presents factual evidence you can't refute logically?
You're obviously just trolling. As I don't think anyone could be that obtuse when it comes to their rights.
It was written during the War of 1812. “Propaganda Song” might have been a bit extra. I wouldn’t kneel during the national anthem personally. I just don’t care what other people do as long as it isn’t affecting anyone else. Getting offended by people kneeling during the anthem is snowflake energy.
I'd argue Cal allowing the players to kneel goes along with this mindset of ending "generational poverty" which is under the umbrella of evaluating Cal as a coach.
You're obviously just trolling.
Says the poster who has created two accounts....one of which is today.
You sure can. Might be consequences if you do but you can say whatever you want to you boss minus threatening him with violence or harm. You can walk right in to his office and cal him every name in the book and guess what? The government cant do a thing to you. Now, your boss can. But not the state Unless you threaten him. You can even protest at work. Again, might be consequences from your work but not the state.
With UK being a PUBLIC institution funded by tax dollars, they are a representative of the state. Just as teachers are technically state employees. As such they cannot limit student speech except in very few specific instances.
I cite Tinker v. Des Moines:
The University of Kentucky can NOT restrict their players or students speech, again, except in very specific instances.
You may hate what they say or do (And doing is usually a protected form of speech, as speech does not have to be verbal) but it’s their very sacred right. So, in this case while you may feel like they shouldn’t be allowed to do that. You’re legally in the wrong.
Thanks for clarifying. I personally don’t agree with the kneeling, as I find it at worst disrespectful to those who have died for our freedoms, and at best an empty “look at me” gesture that doesn’t actually affect any true change. But above all, I just don’t find it germane to the topic at hand, as some apparently do.
How is that trolling? How am I trolling you?
Also, you keep referencing Rupp Arena in your argument, you do realize the kneeling happened at UF, right? Their arena is on campus and owned and operated by the university.
A sign calling for a coach to be removed is harassment???? Then I guess all the talk shows, letters to papers, etc, calling for a coach to be removed are harassment.
Let's take it further to illustrate your lack of critical thinking. All those signs behind a goal when the opponent is shooting FTs will have to be considered harassment.
I guess all those fans in Columbia who were shouting "lock him up" were harassing the player?
Liberal logic is an oxymoron.
