Institutional racism. Don't make me laugh. More like institutional self pity.
Some people love to be the victim. Neurotic mentality.

these are different situations

singers are beholden to record labels and they decide who and when to let someone go, based upon their audience

anyone can spew hatred in certain situations until they are in the employ of or on the dime of someone else, and then that someone determines which image and which standards they wish to uphold

I doubt their lives will be ruined,,, plenty of people sympathize with them and wont think a thing of it


like it or not, in the internet age, public image is important and its a right of public entities to protect theirs,,,

http://conservativetribune.com/white-students-banned-school/

ALERT: White Students BANNED From School Event Because of Their Race.Where's Sharpton?

Imagine a school hosting a forum entitled White Lives Matter, and then imagine the school barring all black students from attending.

Not stop imagining, because the exact opposite scenario occurred late last month at the Illinois-based Oak Park and River Forest High School, where white students were literally prohibited from attending a Black Lives Matter forum.

The principal, Nathaniel Rouse, argued that it is better for black students to talk about racial issues only among themselves, so that they are able to express themselves fully and safely.

I found it has been far easier for me to talk about my experiences with racism with individuals that look like me,he said. I still struggle myself with talking about my experiences with people who don't look like me.

This is reportedly known as the affinity group method.

Furthermore, Rouse expressed his hope of hosting similar events in the future for other minorities, including Latinos and Asians. The irony is that, all the while, he clamored that he's not trying to be exclusive.

Funny way to show it.

Regardless, parents are mortified that a school that prides itself on diversity and inclusion would resort to such non-inclusive tactics, reported Opposing Views.

The high school responded to this outrage with a news release that touted its commitment to improving communications in the future by hosting other racial affinity groups.

Would it be fair to ask whether the mission of improving communications between the races might be more fruitful were ALL THE RACES to be included in the discussion?

Here's another question where the heck is Al Sharpton while this obvious racial discrimination is going on, huh?

Ahhhhh, the old double standard. Will it never end?

Your logic is severely twisted. IN THE COLLEGE ENVIRONMENT blacks can spew hatred, Muslims can spew hatred, but frat boys cannot sing a song meant to be funny in it's offensive nature.

The Constitution is not meant to be "interpreted" by politically motivated idealists with an agenda. In this case it is meant to protect each citizen's right to free speech. It was brought up in the news that a similar case has been brought before the courts and the fraternity, Sigma Chi, won on freedom of speech issues.

From the Washington Post:

1. First, racist speech is constitutionally protected, just as is expression of other contemptible ideas; and universities may not discipline students based on their speech. That has been the unanimous view of courts that have considered campus speech codes and other campus speech restrictions — see here for some citations. The same, of course, is true for fraternity speech, racist or otherwise; see Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v. George Mason University (4th Cir. 1993). (I set aside the separate question of student speech that is evaluated as part of coursework or class participation, which necessarily must be evaluated based on its content; this speech clearly doesn’t qualify.)

UPDATE: The university president wrote that the students are being expelled for “your leadership role in leading a racist and exclusionary chant which has created a hostile educational environment for others.” But there is no First Amendment exception for racist speech, or exclusionary speech, or — as the cases I mentioned above — for speech by university students that “has created a hostile educational environment for others.”

2. Likewise, speech doesn’t lose its constitutional protection just because it refers to violence — “You can hang him from a tree,” “the capitalists will be the first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes,” “by any means necessary” with pictures of guns, “apostates from Islam should be killed.”

3. To be sure, in specific situations, such speech might fall within a First Amendment exception. One example is if it is likely to be perceived as a “true threat” of violence (e.g., saying “apostates from Islam will be killed” or “we’ll hang you from a tree” to a particular person who will likely perceive it as expressing the speaker’s intention to kill him); but that’s not the situation here, where the speech wouldn’t have been taken by any listener as a threat against him or her. Another is if it intended to solicit a criminal act, or to create a conspiracy to commit a criminal act, but, vile as the “hang him from a tree” is, neither of these exceptions are applicable here, either.

4. [UPDATE: Given the president's letter, it's clear that the students are being expelled solely for their speech, and not for the reason discussed in the following paragraphs.] Some people have suggested that the speech may be evidence of discriminatory decisionmaking by the fraternity in admitting members. A university may demand that groups to which it provides various benefits not discriminate in admissions. See Christian Legal Society v. Martinez (2010). Indeed, nondiscrimination rules are applicable to groups generally, even apart from any benefits they get; much depends on whether the groups are seen as small and selective enough to be covered by a right to “intimate association,” and on whether apply antidiscrimination law to the groups would interfere with the groups’ expression of their ideas, and thus burden their right to “expressive associations.” See Roberts v. U.S. Jaycees (1983); Boy Scouts of America v. Dale (2000). The university might thus be able to discipline students who (a) are involved in a fraternity’s admissions decisions, and (b) can be shown to have denied membership to people based on race, or intentionally tried to communicate to potential members that they would deny them membership that way. I don’t think that a discussion saying that discrimination ought to take place, or even that at some unspecified time it will take place, would suffice to constitute a violation of the antidiscrimination rules, though it might be used as evidence in a future case where discrimination against a particular applicant might be alleged.

This situation is just another case of "political correctness" where liberals want to decide who is protected under the Constitution and who is not.

http://conservativetribune.com/white-students-banned-school/

ALERT: White Students BANNED From School Event Because of Their Race.Where's Sharpton?

Imagine a school hosting a forum entitled White Lives Matter, and then imagine the school barring all black students from attending.

Not stop imagining, because the exact opposite scenario occurred late last month at the Illinois-based Oak Park and River Forest High School, where white students were literally prohibited from attending a Black Lives Matter forum.

The principal, Nathaniel Rouse, argued that it is better for black students to talk about racial issues only among themselves, so that they are able to express themselves fully and safely.

I found it has been far easier for me to talk about my experiences with racism with individuals that look like me,he said. I still struggle myself with talking about my experiences with people who don't look like me.

This is reportedly known as the affinity group method.

Furthermore, Rouse expressed his hope of hosting similar events in the future for other minorities, including Latinos and Asians. The irony is that, all the while, he clamored that he's not trying to be exclusive.

Funny way to show it.

Regardless, parents are mortified that a school that prides itself on diversity and inclusion would resort to such non-inclusive tactics, reported Opposing Views.

The high school responded to this outrage with a news release that touted its commitment to improving communications in the future by hosting other racial affinity groups.

Would it be fair to ask whether the mission of improving communications between the races might be more fruitful were ALL THE RACES to be included in the discussion?

Here's another question where the heck is Al Sharpton while this obvious racial discrimination is going on, huh?

I just see a lot of white male conservatives talking about reverse racism blah blah blah..

So, you are judging those who comment according to their gender and race.

See what I'm saying...they always act like the victims when they are the predators. Admit that racism exists and maybe then we will be able to talk.

white guys aren't to 'blame

but a white founding GOVERNMENT create for WHITE MALES,, has great responsibility



and benefited the demographic called 'white' to the detriment of other demographics,,

thats not racism, thats called being pro white... whites helping other whites, seems to be a problem?

lol, when its done with the forced labor of others,, yeah,,,

when you have others working for your benefit with little just compensation,,,,,,,,yeah,,

See what I'm saying...they always act like the victims when they are the predators.

Admit that racism exists and maybe then we will be able to talk.

oh well, i'll have to disagree... nobody stuck a gun to these peoples heads to "forced labor" as you call it... they can always go be a pimp, sell drugs and/or wind up in prison... and the blacks that have power and money, they seem to be just a big of a part of it as the oppressor white man...

that's EXACTLY what happened, they were taken BY FORCE, with WEAPONS,,lol

to come work here and their descendants for hundreds of years in a permanent second class status,,,