FIRE changes UA's speech code rating from 'yellow' to 'red'
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has changed its rating of the University of Arizona's policies on free speech from 'yellow' to 'red.' This appears to follow FIRE's re-examination of UA policy now updated for the 05-06 academic year. The vast majority of the cited documents on the page are community standards for the dormitories. No surprise there.
Update: Laura from Rings of Benzene notes regarding her former dorm-window banner "Free Israel!" and questions whether the policy has changed. The policy change appears to be from banning "insensitive" banners to completely banning all banners and signs from exterior dorm-room windows.
Moreover, FIRE recently commented regarding UNC Greensboro's "free speech zone" policy and a policy requiring clubs to adopt a "nondiscrimination clause" in their constitutions, calling both provisions unconstitutional. UA has similar policies:
- Campus Use (including the "free speech area")
- ASUA Student Organization Handbook (includes "statement of nondiscrimination")
I've contacted FIRE regarding the policies to have them added to the speech code rating page.
What I didn't know about DeConcini
First off, yes there is an article in the Wildcat about the mandatory student union fee proposal. More important duty calls.
John Fund in OpinionJournal today mentions the previous activities of newly-appointed Arizona Regent Dennis DeConcini, a former U.S. Senator, in light of the Jack Abramoff scandal.
Some universities end up employing or being run by the very people who bring them this largesse. Last month Democratic former senator Dennis DeConcini was given a prestigious appointment as a regent of the University of Arizona. Mr. DeConcini retired from the Senate in 1995 after being tarred as one of the "Keating Five," a group of senators who improperly intervened with federal regulators on behalf of corrupt savings-and-loan owner Charles Keating. Mr. DeConcini then became--no surprise--a Washington lobbyist. He now admits he needs to be brought up to speed on education issues. But he had a ready explanation for his appointment: "I used to be very close to the universities. I was able to secure them millions of dollars when I was in the Senate."
The office of Gov. Janet Napolitano, who appointed Mr. DeConcini as a regent, agrees with his assessment. Spokeswoman Jeanine L'Ecuyer told the Arizona State University newspaper that the former senator "was selected for his experience on Capitol Hill, where he helped Arizona universities secure federal funding for research."
Greg Patterson, a Republican former Arizona state legislator, calls the DeConcini appointment outrageous: "Imagine if a former senator was appointed to the board of Boeing and said 'Golly, I don't know much about planes, but when I was in the Senate, I got Boeing a ton of contracts and now I've got this really cool job.' "
That's why I remember DeConcini's name! And that's why I don't remember why; he retired in '95. Seems we Arizona bloggers and commentators missed something!
Rings of Benzene ends hiatus
"ASA Do Your Job" back in action
Now that it's the beginning of the semester and every UA student has been charged a dollar to advocate political positions with which they don't necessarily agree, now is a good time to get it back.
In fact, you have to do it within 21 days of the semester's "start of instruction," which presumably means January 31.
The ASAdoyourjob.org website cites bad lobbying efforts on the part of the Arizona Students' Association. I cite individual rights. When ASA advocates issues I support, I'll give $20. When they don't, I'll give zero.
Hat tip: Rings of Benzene, now on a long and agonizing hiatus presumably because of pharmacy school.
Analyzing "Babble Jim"
Much mall uproar has come about on the mall as a result of the presence of "Bible Jim", yet another wacko in a long line of mouthy, tasteless, and biblically-incorrect mall preachers, most notably "Brother Jed" Smock.
Rather than try to get a civil word across to the guy, the best way to analyze what's going on is to simply read what they believe. Brother Jed believes that he doesn't sin. What does Bible Jim believe?
Bible Jim believes that the love of God expressed in John 3:16 doesn't apply to non-believers. Take this quote:
On that Sunday With some of the most evil people that have ever lived on the planet earth promoting the greatest single sin that has ever occurred short of the crucifixion of Christ, what was your message? GOD LOVES YOU! ???
If you tell an unsaved, unrepentant person that God personally loves him WHEN HE REALLY DOES NOT, it becomes a serious crime against the very character of God Himself. I believe this offense is committed by Christian people on a regular basis to the non-Christian world. Our language has one word for "love", whereas the Greek language has many words for "love". There are different types of love in the Greek language, but in our language we adapted the meaning for only one of these words, meaning personal affection (PHILEO), and have applied it across the board.
The love in John 3:16 is AGAPE, it is not affectionate at all. So the words should be explained, when telling someone God loves them, when they're thinking personally and affectionately, and God is not.
If a man responds to John 3:16 (love which is void of any experiential relationship), he will experience God's PHILE0 love. But if he does not respond to it (the Cross) he will continue to be under condemnation and wrath.
Technically speaking a person could force John 3:16 to make it look like God personally loves the sinner. But even in this attempt the quality of this love is of absolutely no practical or personal value to the unredeemed sinner. Other than providing air for him to breathe and the option for him to repent of his sins and trust in Jesus,
Bible Jim goes off a Greek technicality and completely skips over the word "world." I'm no Greek scholar, but "world" in the Bible typically refers to the entire blue and green ball. Not just Israel. Not just the apostles. Not just the few disciples Jesus had at the time. And don't forget the verse immediately following John 3:16 either.
(16) For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
(17) For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
Luckily, the world is not void of good and decent mall preachers. We need more Cliffe Knechtles, not more Jeds and Jims. Take the time to view Knechtle's arguments, including those filmed right on the UA mall and you'll see what I mean.
UA presidential candidates should satisfy "Stupid White Men" award recipients
Two of them are "stupid white men." One is a woman. One is Indian (from India). Satisfied?
Lincoln, Nebraska may copy Tucson's "red tag" program
The Drudge Report links to an article in the Lincoln Journal Star today which reports that Lincoln city leaders are considering adopting a "red tag" prgram similar to that of Tucson.
After having had a beer bottle dropped from a second-story catwalk onto my car, I'm here to say that the program works. The parties end once the tag is in place. At least that's the story at my apartment complex. Kudos to TPD and, hopefully, city leaders in Lincoln.
Wildcat leaks information on UA president picks?
An article without relevant content on the Arizona Daily Wildcat website is titled "White men dominating presidential pool." Surely, this must mean the pool for University of Arizona President.
Meanwhile, the Arizona Daily Star reports that the names are currently secret.
For the error, the Arizona Daily Wildcat is hereby awarded the Stupid White Men award!!
Correction/Clarification: There is an article entitled "White men dominating presidential pool" regarding demographics of 94 applicants. It's not online by webmaster error. Nonetheless, the Arizona Daily Star reports that the pool is down to four, making this article completely obsolete.
Nonetheless, your humble correspondent earns the Go pick up the stinking print edition, you idiot. award for his track record of relying on an unreliable online edition.
Anonymous comment notes discrepancy between Wildcat and Dean of Students report
The following is an anonymous comment. First off, this is what I get for reading the online edition of the Wildcat. Secondly, I take no responsibility for what is contained. I have not checked yesterday's printed Wildcat to confirm the truth of the comment.
Mr. O'Hara I cannot believe that you posted this but did not post about the discrepancies between what was told to the Daily Wildcat and what was in the report filed with the Dean of Students office which was noted in the "Clarifications" section of the Wednesday, January 11, 2006 edition of the Wildcat. This segment states:
'In the Nov. 30 article "Bernsen accused of sexual misdeeds" and in the Dec. 7 article "ASUA can't confirm suspected meetings," the complaints filed with the Dean of Students did not claim that the Associated Students of the University of Arizona President Cade Bernsen had repeatedly threatened or intimidated the alleged victims to remain quiet. The Women voiced these claims in interviews with the Arizona Daily Wildcat. Also in the Nov. 30 article, it was reported that one of the complainants alleged that Bernsen made unwelcome advances on one occasion while the two were alone at Bernsen's home. Her complaint des not state whether the two were alone in Bernsen's home; she claimed in an interview with the Daily Wildcat that the two were alone in Bernsen's room at the time of the alleged incident. In addition, the Dec. 7 article reports that both women claimed to have been the victims of inappropriate touching by Bernsen while in the student government offices. Only one of the women in fact complained of inappropriate touching by Bernsen.'
This, I believe, adds a whole new dimension to this case.
Immediate conclusion: The Wildcat needs to add its corrections/clarifications online.
Update: Legitimacy confirmed.
Bernsen fires 5 ASUA officials (?!)
You've got to be kidding me. With no proof that he's guilty, it either means he's an innocent man standing his ground or a guilty man going down who's willing to take ASUA with him. Meanwhile, the senate continues to delay his impeachment hearing.
Is impeaching Bernsen for missing the ABOR meetings becoming more of an option for the senate now?
Democrats attack their own principles in Alito hearing
Much of the Democrats' anger at Alito stems from his affiliation with the "Concerned Alumni of Princeton" which allegedly stated that a 40% student population of women and minorities would "vitiate the alumni body of the future".
Regardless of the illegitimacy of the attack against Alito and the group (see D'Souza's comment), think about the quote for a moment and how it applies today. Universities such as the University of Arizona routinely promote "diversity" (a euphemism for affirmative action) in order to justify race-based admissions. This sets aside certain better-qualified individuals in order to benefit the group as a whole.
Isn't this the exact ultimate train of thought for which the Concerned Alumni quote is calling? The greater good of the whole trumps the individual. Pro-affirmative action Democrats having a problem with that reeks of hypocrisy.
Katy Lee Reel, R.I.P.
About two months ago, I posted a link to the blog of Katy Reel, who was receiving treatment for brain cancer. Katy went to be with the Lord on January 2. Please keep her family in your prayers.
ASUA Men's Resource Center (PDF)
Yes, another parody. Yes, I have way too much time on my hands. Yes, their executive director did publicly criticize me in her official capacity. Yes, I made the hammer-and-sickle ASUA logo myself. Images other than the "MRC" and ASUA logos are all obtained from the public domain.
Special thanks to Evan Coyne Maloney for hinting at the possibility multiple times.
Live Culture. Live in a Residence Hall. (PDF)
There's nothing going on at the university right now, so I had to make fun of something. Not G-rated.
Note to my two or more friends living in Cochise Hall: I'm not calling you a name.