Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Israel/Palestine
In reply to the discussion: A Closer Look at Students for Justice in Palestine [View all]shira
(30,109 posts)8. Can't condemn SJP racists? Here's CUNY's anti-semitism report...
CUNY SHOULD CONTINUE TO CONDEMN HATE SPEECH WHILE PROTECTING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, SAYS ANTI-SEMITISM REPORT
...The report found that much of the offensive speech even if featured at die-ins, mock checkpoints and student signs and banners was protected under the First Amendment. As a public university, CUNY is limited in the ways that it can respond to hate speech, whether the words are anti-Semitic, racist, anti-Muslim, or anti-LGBT, the report stated.
CUNY cannot punish such speech unless it is part of a course of conduct so pervasive or severe that it denies a persons ability to pursue an education or participate in University life. It cannot mandate civility or sanction isolated derogatory comments, the attorneys wrote.
But what CUNY cannot punish, it can still condemn, they said. They noted that as a general rule, CUNYS Administrators and College Presidents have spoken out against anti-Semitic comments. That practice must continue; hate speech must be challenged promptly and forcefully lest it breed.
The report added, What CUNY can sanction is threatening conduct that puts a community member in fear for his safety. It said actions that go beyond offensive speech like threatening violence or forcibly pulling signs from the hands of a demonstrator should be punished if the persons responsible are identified.....
<snip>
There is no finding of a pervasive atmosphere hostile to Jewish students which significantly interferes with their educational opportunities, but there is documentation of many examples of hateful speech and protest by individuals and by some student organizations that are troubling, Yudof and Waltzer said in a letter to Chancellor Milliken. The messages are hurtful to Jewish students even if they are constitutionally protected. A few other actions beyond protected speech, the report affirms, involved conduct bordering on assaults.
http://www1.cuny.edu/mu/forum/2016/09/09/cuny-should-continue-to-condemn-hate-speech-while-protecting-first-amendment-rights-says-anti-semitism-report/
...The report found that much of the offensive speech even if featured at die-ins, mock checkpoints and student signs and banners was protected under the First Amendment. As a public university, CUNY is limited in the ways that it can respond to hate speech, whether the words are anti-Semitic, racist, anti-Muslim, or anti-LGBT, the report stated.
CUNY cannot punish such speech unless it is part of a course of conduct so pervasive or severe that it denies a persons ability to pursue an education or participate in University life. It cannot mandate civility or sanction isolated derogatory comments, the attorneys wrote.
But what CUNY cannot punish, it can still condemn, they said. They noted that as a general rule, CUNYS Administrators and College Presidents have spoken out against anti-Semitic comments. That practice must continue; hate speech must be challenged promptly and forcefully lest it breed.
The report added, What CUNY can sanction is threatening conduct that puts a community member in fear for his safety. It said actions that go beyond offensive speech like threatening violence or forcibly pulling signs from the hands of a demonstrator should be punished if the persons responsible are identified.....
<snip>
There is no finding of a pervasive atmosphere hostile to Jewish students which significantly interferes with their educational opportunities, but there is documentation of many examples of hateful speech and protest by individuals and by some student organizations that are troubling, Yudof and Waltzer said in a letter to Chancellor Milliken. The messages are hurtful to Jewish students even if they are constitutionally protected. A few other actions beyond protected speech, the report affirms, involved conduct bordering on assaults.
http://www1.cuny.edu/mu/forum/2016/09/09/cuny-should-continue-to-condemn-hate-speech-while-protecting-first-amendment-rights-says-anti-semitism-report/
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
36 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I think that Canary Mission is a hate site, and that you should avoid promoting it.
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#2
One may wonder why you chose to bolster your arguments with an article from a pro-Republican site.
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#6
I think you're misreading the CUNY report on the alleged SJP anti-Semitism.
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#10
Slander is considered protected speech, which makes it possible for a certain Presidential Pretender
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#12
It's a bit of a stretch to call Israel a secular state already, but that's beside the point...
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#24
I suppose that the irony of you posting in favor of the notion of free speech in one post (#9),
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#11
I would characterize her posts in favor of banning SJP as being against the notion
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#15
I don't know of any instance where SJP is calling for Israel's destruction...
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#23
SJP is part of Omar Barghouti's BDS movement which calls for Israel's destruction...
shira
Oct 2016
#26
I'm sorry - I just assumed that calling for equal rights wasn't considered racist.
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#29
It actually seems as if we lack common ground for a discussion on this subject. n/t
Little Tich
Oct 2016
#36