Selective enforcement at OU

[Rebel10]

Some think they are horrible, some think they were just joking around, some think they just made a stupid decision. My question is about them possibly enrolling at SMU. They are very close to SMU and may enroll.

[smupony94]

Some think they are horrible, some think they were just joking around, some think they just made a stupid decision. My question is about them possibly enrolling at SMU. They are very close to SMU and may enroll.

They might apply but would they be let in?

[Topper]

The song, or chant, or whatever it was, was about SAE not allowing black men into their fraternity. As an organization sanctioned by a state supported institution, discrimiation against anyone based on race is a violation of federal law. I suspect that there is not currently a single black person in the OU SAE chapter and these fools made it clear why.

[gostangs]

I would guess you will see both of these guys take a year off and then come back around to other schools. I would not expect either of them to be at SMU.

Also - Rebel - I think you are confusing concern with 1st amendment rights with support for the perpetrators. Seeing almost no support for them, so lets not pretend there is an issue there when there is not. Most comments I have seen (over 95%) have it somewhere between stupid and really stupid and vile.

[couch 'em]

The song, or chant, or whatever it was, was about SAE not allowing black men into their fraternity. As an organization sanctioned by a state supported institution, discrimiation against anyone based on race is a violation of federal law. I suspect that there is not currently a single black person in the OU SAE chapter and these fools made it clear why.

interesting wrinkle. But under that line of thinking won't all fraternities and sorority be in violation due to gender discrimination?

[Digetydog]

The song, or chant, or whatever it was, was about SAE not allowing black men into their fraternity. As an organization sanctioned by a state supported institution, discrimiation against anyone based on race is a violation of federal law. I suspect that there is not currently a single black person in the OU SAE chapter and these fools made it clear why.

Oddly enough, the SAE chapter at OU definitely had at least 1 African-American member relatively recently. Needless to say, that man is angry about what happened at his house.

http://kfor.com/2015/03/09/last-black-o ... artbroken/

[Puckhead48E]

Boren is a coward. Plain and simple. Broke the law to satisfy the PC junta

Since both the young men are locally from wealthy families maybe they will enroll at SMU. Looking at some of the comments made it sounds like they would get a lot of sympathy and support at SMU.

I won't be as gentle as others...this statement is proof this discussion has progress far beyond your capacity to intelligently interpret these points. Not a single person on here has said anything even close to supporting these idiots. Some have suggested they believe their song was rooted in youthful alcoholic indulgence that led to a regretful song being sung. Others say this act is rooted solely in racism. I think the truth lies somewhere in between. Neither is support in any way. All discussions regarding the actions taken by the University following the publication of the video are related to legal matters and interpretations of how to best respond to such an act that is both effectual and legal. Maybe one or two outliers made their way in to suggest the school might have acted differently if it weren't a bus of white kids singing this...but that is really an anomaly in this discussion. So take a seat, take a breather, and relax. This is not a harbinger of the apocalypse, nor proof that society is falling apart at the seams.

[East Coast Mustang]

Yeah, Rebel, this isn't rocket science.

What they chanted? Terrible, stupid, and inexcusable. But terrible, stupid, and inexcusable things still are protected by the First Amendment, provided they don't fall under another exception, which these probably don't.

As for admitting them to SMU...right now (or in the Fall), no. These guys have a lot of growing up to do, and I imagine they will be growing up very quickly as a result of this life-altering event. For the rest of their lives, whenever an employer or client or potential date Googles their name, this will be the first thing that pops up. To me, that's punishment enough. But I don't think they should be barred from higher education for the rest of their lives. College is about learning new things and gaining new perspectives, and they obviously need to gain some new perspectives. I don't see why they should be shunned from colleges for the rest of eternity because of one bad mistake at 18 years old...it's not like they killed or raped anyone. It's bad, for sure, but in the grand scheme of things there's a lot worse things kids their age do on a regular basis.

[Rebel10]

Yeah, Rebel, this isn't rocket science.

What they chanted? Terrible, stupid, and inexcusable. But terrible, stupid, and inexcusable things still are protected by the First Amendment, provided they don't fall under another exception, which these probably don't.

As for admitting them to SMU...right now (or in the Fall), no. These guys have a lot of growing up to do, and I imagine they will be growing up very quickly as a result of this life-altering event. For the rest of their lives, whenever an employer or client or potential date Googles their name, this will be the first thing that pops up. To me, that's punishment enough. But I don't think they should be barred from higher education for the rest of their lives. College is about learning new things and gaining new perspectives, and they obviously need to gain some new perspectives. I don't see why they should be shunned from colleges for the rest of eternity because of one bad mistake at 18 years old...it's not like they killed or raped anyone. It's bad, for sure, but in the grand scheme of things there's a lot worse things kids their age do on a regular basis.

My question had nothing to do with the 1st amendment. I just asked if anyone would be supportive of them enrolling at SMU. They are not going to be banned from other colleges but I was specifically talking about SMU. Do you think SMU would be a place for these young men to get a second chance, if not the fall then what about next year or some point in the future?

[Grant Carter]

This release from the ACLU of Oklahoma states what most posters on this thread have said.
http://acluok.org/2015/03/aclu-of-oklahoma-statement-in-response-to-the-university-of-oklahomas-announcement-of-vp-of-diversity-position/

Rebel, I realize that your more recent posts have been focused on the hypothetical you dreamed up, but earlier in the thread you had posts that indicated to me that you did not understand how people could criticize the school for their actions without supporting the students' actions. Hopefully seeing that the ACLU has done just that will help you see that it is a reasonable approach.

[Rebel10]

This release from the ACLU of Oklahoma states what most posters on this thread have said.
http://acluok.org/2015/03/aclu-of-oklahoma-statement-in-response-to-the-university-of-oklahomas-announcement-of-vp-of-diversity-position/

Rebel, I realize that your more recent posts have been focused on the hypothetical you dreamed up, but earlier in the thread you had posts that indicated to me that you did not understand how people could criticize the school for their actions without supporting the students' actions. Hopefully seeing that the ACLU has done just that will help you see that it is a reasonable approach.

Good post Grant. Now as far as them attempting to enrolling in SMU, I think that is another issue all together. And I think since they are very close to the campus (one at Highland Park) that it would not be unreasonable for them to attempt to finish up their education at SMU.

[NewAgeMustange]

I would be supportive of them applying and going to SMU if they had the grades to enroll as transfers. At earliest, they would be eligible for either Summer (June 1) or Fall (April 1) as transfers. Although it depends on their credit load. SMU considers anyone that is a 1st year <30 hours as a first year transfer and takes into account both college and high school grades. Over 30 then they are considered not a first year and have to have at least a 2.7.. Not hard to have 30 hours. 18 semester course load + 12 transfer..That could be a couple 4/5's on the AP tests and receiving credit for classes.

[HTXPonyUp]

IMO, I wouldn't be supportive of them enrolling here. That just paints another negative image on the University and gives more fuel to the media to continue to make this a widely publicize issue. Plus, I think this issue can spill into our recruiting efforts and we are already in a pit when it comes to recruiting.

I mean, yes, they should get a second chance. I just don't see it happening at SMU. They should just go to JUCO.

[Topper]

The song, or chant, or whatever it was, was about SAE not allowing black men into their fraternity. As an organization sanctioned by a state supported institution, discrimiation against anyone based on race is a violation of federal law. I suspect that there is not currently a single black person in the OU SAE chapter and these fools made it clear why.

interesting wrinkle. But under that line of thinking won't all fraternities and sorority be in violation due to gender discrimination?

Good question. I don't know. Race and gender discrimination are governed by different statutes. Also racial minority groups have constitutional protections that don't apply to females.

[Rayburn]

If they want to enroll at SMU, let them. My God, all they did was sing a naughty song. I sang worse when I played Rugby.