Student kicked out for telling professor there are only two genders

[Juvenal]

"Rolling Stone" and "accurate, original reporting" probably don't belong in the same sentence. Can you say "A Rape on Campus"?

I can say cherry picking, too.

It's not just bad math, it's dishonest bad math. Annoying, like nails on the chalkboard, in comic sans.

[rogue06]

I can say cherry picking, too.

It's not just bad math, it's dishonest bad math. Annoying, like nails on the chalkboard, in comic sans.

Just a couple weeks ago while thumbing through a copy of RS that was on the magazine rack where I was buying groceries, I wistfully wondered when exactly did they cease to be relevant.

[One Bad Pig]

Absolutely. But only one of us posts stories and defend them as if they are facts that support their ideological perspective.

I dunno, Jim. That seems to fit you pretty well. I'm sure you could figure out what a boy is if it didn't matter to your ideological POV.

[JimL]

I dunno, Jim. That seems to fit you pretty well. I'm sure you could figure out what a boy is if it didn't matter to your ideological POV.

You can't even definitively define what a boy is OBP, and even if you attempted to it would be an arbitrary definition.

[RumTumTugger]

I consider MM's post in which he baselessly accused a group of people of having a mental disorder to be well outside the bounds of acceptable conduct and somewhere on the continuum of unacceptable personal attack on others through to illegal hate speech. He did not provide a logical argument that might be considered or discussed, he provided nothing but a vicious personal and attack on others. I would not allow such a post if I were setting the rules here. He is a serial offender in this regard. I consider his behaviour totally unacceptable, think it reflects badly on his character, and hope my reposinse to him conveyed at least a little of my contempt and disgust for his approach, the validity of the 'ideas' he's putting forth, and my disgust at his stupidity and mmoral character that he reveals through such posts.

Hypocrisy your name is Starlight here is a little sample of your hypocrisy where you accuse whole groups of people you disagree with insane with no basis what so ever.

There's plenty of other fact-checking organizations. They all observe that US conservatives get their facts wrong regularly, far far more than US liberals. There was a reason that Karl Rove described liberals as "reality-based" and Stephen Colbert joked that "reality has a well-known liberal bias". Because empirically speaking, in the US the 'liberals' tend to get their facts right and the 'conservatives' tend to get their facts wrong. This is what makes the rest of the world have such an awed and horrified fascination with US politics, because the conservatives there are just so insane.

I simply wanted to make it clear that I don't see there as being any form of equivalency between the Republicans and the Democrats in the US. The Democrats are terrible politicians for the most part and pretty corrupt for the most part. I really don't see the vast majority of the Democrats as being very great at all. But they are orders of magnitude better than the Republicans who are just absolutely nutty and utterly corrupt.

The Republican party has basically gone insane and lost almost all connection with reality.

Just because the Republicans are currently the most insane major party in the entire Western world,

Otherwise the insane right-wing moronic Republicans[/B]

At least MM has Science on his side; You don't regarding the people you called insane in the above examples.

Get a clue Starlight just because a group doesn't accept your view doesn't mean they are insane.

So Before you try to pull the fake splinter out of someone esle's eyes take the log out of yours.



Do you really want start falsely calling MM immoral? You who has stated you are OK with laws that would allow people to kill 3 month old babies.

[Darth Executor]

The source doesn't matter, it's the same story, the students word against the professors, with a hearing on it scheduled for the 19th of March. I tend to believe the professor, you tend to believe the student, but how about you wait for some actual evidence as to who may be telling the truth before smearing the professor due to your persecution complex.

experience suggests that we should never give benefit of the doubt to leftist trash until conclusively proved otherwise

[JimL]

Hypocrisy your name is Starlight here is a little sample of your hypocrisy where you accuse whole groups of people you disagree with insane with no basis what so ever.











At least MM has Science on his side; You don't regarding the people you called insane in the above examples.

Get a clue Starlight just because a group doesn't accept your view doesn't mean they are insane.

So Before you try to pull the fake splinter out of someone esle's eyes take the log out of yours.



Do you really want start falsely calling MM immoral? You who has stated you are OK with laws that would allow people to kill 3 month old babies.

He said "baselessly accuse," and star's accussations against republicans in general are not baseless. Though insane might be a little over the top, I agree with him that within the current batch of republicans in Congress and in the White House, there is a pretty nutty and corrupt bunch. Unfortunately that's a reflection on their constituency as well. I mean seriously, what kind of a people would cast their votes for tea party wack jobs the likes of Louis Gomert to represent them?

[One Bad Pig]

You can't even definitively define what a boy is OBP, and even if you attempted to it would be an arbitrary definition.

A male who is not yet an adult. Chromosomes are not arbitrary. "Adult" is to some extent based on societal norms, but it is hardly arbitrary.

[JimL]

A male who is not yet an adult. Chromosomes are not arbitrary. "Adult" is to some extent based on societal norms, but it is hardly arbitrary.

Yeah right, and a man is a male who is no longer a boy.

[One Bad Pig]

Yeah right, and a man is a male who is no longer a boy.

Well, yes. Do you have a non-arbitrary reason to believe otherwise?

No offense, but is something going wrong in your life right now? You're not your usual self lately; you're not typically this combative.

[RumTumTugger]

He said "baselessly accuse," and star's accussations against republicans in general are not baseless. Though insane might be a little over the top, I agree with him that within the current batch of republicans in Congress and in the White House, there is a pretty nutty and corrupt bunch. Unfortunately that's a reflection on their constituency as well. I mean seriously, what kind of a people would cast their votes for a wack job like Louis Gomert to represent them?

and the Democrat party isn't as corrupt as you think the Republican Party is. JimL you are a reflection of their corruption But corrupting influence is more subtle they keep their electorialship uninformed about what is happening with the help of their MSM buddies.

[Starlight]

At least MM has Science on his side;

No. He doesn't.

I'm a scientist. I've been discussing in this thread what the science actually says on the issue. MM is wrong on the science.

You don't regarding the people you called insane in the above examples.

I think that the last couple of decades of public conduct on the part of the Republican party constitutes good reason for rational and reasonable people around the world to be deeply, deeply, concerned about them. From running torture programs, to collapsing the world economy, to attacking other countries, to destabilizing the middle east, to following foreign policies that foster the promotion of Islamic terrorism, to refusing to act to help stop world-damaging climate change, to threatening the use of nuclear weapons etc. I find it difficult to characterize that set of behavior as anything other than 'insane'.

I am far from the only one who has problems with this behavior. In the news here this week, one of the top New Zealand diplomats to the US is facing disciplinary action here for inappropriate behavior because she tweeted "get your [swearword meaning 'act'] together [for the next presidential elections] or we will all die" in the direction of US politicians. And, you'll recall, Obama was awarded a Nobel prize for peace largely before he'd done anything due to the world's relief that Republicans were no longer in charge of US foreign policy.

So Before you try to pull the fake splinter out of someone esle's eyes take the log out of yours.

[Starlight]

Sparko,

Let's say the student in the OP had written the following:

I'm a "problem student". I express my own viewpoints vigorously in the classroom environment, even when I haven't been asked to. Various professors find this behavior "disruptive". Several of them have also told me they have concerns about the content of the views I express, saying it seems to be "sexist" or "racist". I have been accused of offending and upsetting other students in the classes by what I say.

I don't see the classroom environment as a 'learning environment' in the traditional sense where the teacher teaches and the students learn. I see it as an arena for the combat of ideas and worldviews. I see myself as being on the side of conservatism and Christianity. I see the authorities as being on the side of progressivism and secularism. It is their worldview against mine, and so I put forth my ideas forcefully. Some lecturers have described this as "angry outbursts" and "disruptive".

Most recently I have been banned from a class for this pending a disciplinary hearing by a panel of students and teachers at the educational institution I attend. I view this as a suppression of my first amendment rights to free speech. My rights to forthrightly speak my mind and express my views as I see fit in the classroom environment trump the other students rights to be able to learn from the teacher and have a pleasant learning environment.

I think what's really going on is that the progressive and secular establishment are out to get me because they just can't cope with their viewpoints being critiqued. My compelling arguments for my viewpoints are just so convincing and powerful that they fear me speaking up because it would undo their brainwashing of the other students.

In my view the above would constitute an accurate and honest description of the student's situation.

If the student had written that, would it change your opinion of the situation? I don't see this as a case of anything more or less than a disruptive student is causing problems in class and is having escalating disciplinary procedures taken against him as a result. You seem to see it as some sort of speech-suppression of conservative views. Can you explain why you see it that way rather than as a mundane dealing with behavioral issues?

[One Bad Pig]

I'm a scientist.

Balderdash. You're a computer programmer with a habit of arguing from emotion. I'm sure that you're very good at what you do, but you've proven quite handily over the years that you're incapable of approaching politics (or any other soft science) with anything like objectivity. Let's not pretend otherwise.

[Starlight]

Balderdash. You're a computer programmer with a habit of arguing from emotion. I'm sure that you're very good at what you do, but you've proven quite handily over the years that you're incapable of approaching politics (or any other soft science) with anything like objectivity. Let's not pretend otherwise.

You're wrong about everything as per usual OBP. It frankly amazes me how consistently you manage to accomplish that feat.

FYI, it's been almost a decade since I worked as a computer programmer. I left that job, then published a book on Christian theology, then did a PhD in a science field, and have published a half dozen papers in scientific journals. Life isn't static.

And your assessment of me as non-objective and as arguing from emotion is...
If you accused me of being borderline-autistic, overly rational and unemotional, and as having too much of a rationalistic and objective approach to things like arguments and politics, then you might have a valid point. As usual, you're so completely wrong, it's funny.