$2 Million Lawsuit

[SMU 86]

Couch,

I think you meant "previous behavior" of some Black people (but I understand what you are saying). Anyway, this is truly not a good situation for the publicity of the school. The coach should be able to establish rules of conduct for the team. Also, as Stallion I believe pointed out the scholarships are renewed yearly. If Coach Rompola did not renew the scholarship that is something that the coach has the right to do. We should be ok.

[Phxfan]

It is obvious that most on this board, the vast, vast majority on this board do not agree with my position. And what is my position? The whole thing does not meet the smell test.

What smell test? Do you find it 'fishy' for a coach to not want the drama of players dating, jealousy, break ups, and all the associated problems of players dating each other? This sounds unlikely to you?

Again, your bigotry against SMU/Texans is truly offensive. If I were to assume all Black people were guilty, based on past "previous behavior" of Black people, that would obviously be racist to an insane degree. You are just as guilty.

This is not my previous " bad behavior", nor yours. It is SMU's. It is the Princeton review. What business is it of the coach of the SMU women's basketball team to ask, (stipulations here) about an athletes relationships? PERIOD. If SMU was not on this top 15 list, SMU would probably be OK. It is not OK. It has made it to the Advocate. It will make it to USA Today unless someone puts on the breaks. This University has been through enough, GET IT, enough. I am really on your side but you don't know it. Do you want SMU drug through this? Fortunately the stock market/economy is taking all the news. In the end it may not even matter. If it does matter, wouldn't you want SMU to look good? At least not look bad?

[couch 'em]

What business is it of the coach of the SMU women's basketball team to ask, (stipulations here) about an athletes relationships? PERIOD.

The coach has every right to ask that question, because relationships between team members can have a major major effect on the team. Jealousy, breakups, favoritism, etc., can have a massive negative effect. Are you really even asking this?

I don't want SMU to look bad, but to fire Rompola from her job, and thus hurt her ability to get other jobs, and her income potential, etc., just because some former player is bitter that she sucks at bball is just plain wrong. Anyone who doesn't have an agenda can see that it is reasonable for a coach to tell players on the team to not date each other. It is also reasonable to dismiss a player from the team who is undermining the coach's authority and team chemistry by being a troublemaker and trying to get the coach fired.

Sometimes you have to stand up for what is morally right, not what is easiest or what is best for yourself.

[couch 'em]

It is the Princeton review.

And your harping on this Princeton Review "alternative lifestyle not an alternative" ranking is still a load of BS. First off, I graduated in '05 - I am basically part of the SMU that would have been rated by PR. Second, that ranking shows that there isn't a large culture group of 'alternative lifestyle' (which means many, many more things than gay) people at SMU. Not that these people face some sort of abuse or discrimination.

I was friends or acquaintances with at least 5 openly homosexual or bisexual individuals at SMU. Not one of them ever expressed any incidents of discrimination. I have personally asked two of them who were openly gay men, and would probably be perceived as such by an average person. They have confirmed they had no problems or incidents.

I was not part of Meadows, or any other unusual subset of SMU. The two individuals who's experiences I asked about were not part of Meadows or any special subset of SMU.

I'm sure there are people at SMU who choose to not associate with gays. So what? I choose to not associate with [deleted]. I also choose not to associate with Christian fundamentalists who feel the need to preach at others. I find both of those groups to be very annoying and unpleasant. I am not intolerant or discriminatory against those particular lifestyles when I need to interact with them.

[Phxfan]

What business is it of the coach of the SMU women's basketball team to ask, (stipulations here) about an athletes relationships? PERIOD.

The coach has every right to ask that question, because relationships between team members can have a major major effect on the team. Jealousy, breakups, favoritism, etc., can have a massive negative effect. Are you really even asking this?

I don't want SMU to look bad, but to fire Rompola from her job, and thus hurt her ability to get other jobs, and her income potential, etc., just because some former player is bitter that she sucks at bball is just plain wrong. Anyone who doesn't have an agenda can see that it is reasonable for a coach to tell players on the team to not date each other. It is also reasonable to dismiss a player from the team who is undermining the coach's authority and team chemistry by being a troublemaker and trying to get the coach fired.

Sometimes you have to stand up for what is morally right, not what is easiest or what is best for yourself.

The only teams that I can think of, that might have a straight synonym to this would be the swim/diving team. Has there been problems there? Maybe golf? Or there could be things on the football team, mens basketball, soccer that no person has heard about except those involved. Sometimes you have to stand up for what is morally right. I am doing that. And, by the way, so did Harvey Milk. And by the way, SMU nor Dallas had nothing to do with that.

[Phxfan]

It is the Princeton review.

And your harping on this Princeton Review "alternative lifestyle not an alternative" ranking is still a load of BS. First off, I graduated in '05 - I am basically part of the SMU that would have been rated by PR. Second, that ranking shows that there isn't a large culture group of 'alternative lifestyle' (which means many, many more things than gay) people at SMU. Not that these people face some sort of abuse or discrimination.

I was friends or acquaintances with at least 5 openly homosexual or bisexual individuals at SMU. Not one of them ever expressed any incidents of discrimination. I have personally asked two of them who were openly gay men, and would probably be perceived as such by an average person. They have confirmed they had no problems or incidents.

I was not part of Meadows, or any other unusual subset of SMU. The two individuals who's experiences I asked about were not part of Meadows or any special subset of SMU.

I'm sure there are people at SMU who choose to not associate with gays. So what? I choose to not associate with [deleted]. I also choose not to associate with Christian fundamentalists who feel the need to preach at others. I find both of those groups to be very annoying and unpleasant. I am not intolerant or discriminatory against those particular lifestyles when I need to interact with them.

This is a tough thing for any person or University that is caught up in this. AGAIN SMU IS CAUGHT UP. NOT UT, NOT GA. TECH, NOT ALA, Not OLE MISS, not Texas Tech, not Baylor. SMU is part of the UMC. PERIOD. Again, it is not those schools, because SMU does not have the same mission. I am sure that SMU is better than those Universities. Maybe you folks need to show the way? YOUR school is being sued. You and I, both know that Dallas is not a great place to be Gay. Niether is PHX. But it is what it is. SF was not a great place to be Gay. Your brothers and sisters and kids made it OK. (unless Harvey Milk or any # of those beaten to a pulp, blood all over was just a game, etc.) It happened. Could you folks in Dallas do what SF could not do, Could SMU stand up and say NO MORE. Could a southern school say no more? Should a Methodist School say NO MORE?

[Dement-ed]

The only teams that I can think of, that might have a straight synonym to this would be the swim/diving team. Has there been problems there? Maybe golf? Or there could be things on the football team, mens basketball, soccer that no person has heard about except those involved.

How did you pull the swim teams out of the air?

Two things:
1. What is moral for someone else in terms of his or lifestyle of choice is not up to you or me or anyone other than the people involved to decide.
2. The reason you don't know about such situations on other teams is because no former scrub has thrown it out in public in search of a quick buck, and because it's not anyone's business but that of the people involved.

[Pony4Life]

SMU is part of the UMC. PERIOD.

No, it's nota PART of the UMC or any other church. Some of its founders might have been Methodists, some of its board members might be members of the UMC and some of its faculty and staff are Methodist. But it is a university, and a great one... one of those places where people are taught to think for themselves and make their own decisions. Whether you're gay or not is your business and nobody else's. This is a sensitive issue that affects one of our better programs and a great coach. Do not turn this into a morality issue, especially, when you know no more details than any of the rest of us do.

[Phxfan]

SMU is part of the UMC. PERIOD.

No, it's nota PART of the UMC or any other church. Some of its founders might have been Methodists, some of its board members might be members of the UMC and some of its faculty and staff are Methodist. But it is a university, and a great one... one of those places where people are taught to think for themselves and make their own decisions. Whether you're gay or not is your business and nobody else's. This is a sensitive issue that affects one of our better programs and a great coach. Do not turn this into a morality issue, especially, when you know no more details than any of the rest of us do.

I am going to try to answer your comments 1 by 1 first, I did not bring up the morality issue. I do respect the person that did. Some of your members might be NAZI'S, is that a moral issue? I will try to answer on your points.
1. SMU is owned by the United Methodist Church.
2. It is a great university and could become greater.
3. Maybe that is why the UMC owns this, maybe they want you to think?
4. At least you are thinking.
5. Dallas may be able to do what SF tried to do. Ironic, but might hold the key?

[jtstang]

It is the Princeton review.

Your position would be a little more tenable if you had done any independent research on the subject instead of adopting a third party's survey wholesale without any idea how it was conducted. If you had done any research on your own, I think you'd find that SMU is pretty tolerant, despite the Princeton Review.

[mrydel]

It is the Princeton review.

Your position would be a little more tenable if you had done any independent research on the subject instead of adopting a third party's survey wholesale without any idea how it was conducted. If you had done any research on your own, I think you'd find that SMU is pretty tolerant, despite the Princeton Review.

You all seem to think this guy has some credibility. If you recall he originally came to the board because he owned some Ford Motor Company stock and thought that FMC was behind Ford Stadium. Please make him go away. This is a football board.

[jtstang]

It is the Princeton review.

Your position would be a little more tenable if you had done any independent research on the subject instead of adopting a third party's survey wholesale without any idea how it was conducted. If you had done any research on your own, I think you'd find that SMU is pretty tolerant, despite the Princeton Review.

You all seem to think this guy has some credibility. If you recall he originally came to the board because he owned some Ford Motor Company stock and thought that FMC was behind Ford Stadium. Please make him go away. This is a football board.

Actually, this is a basketball board.

[mrydel]

It is the Princeton review.

Your position would be a little more tenable if you had done any independent research on the subject instead of adopting a third party's survey wholesale without any idea how it was conducted. If you had done any research on your own, I think you'd find that SMU is pretty tolerant, despite the Princeton Review.

You all seem to think this guy has some credibility. If you recall he originally came to the board because he owned some Ford Motor Company stock and thought that FMC was behind Ford Stadium. Please make him go away. This is a football board.

Actually, this is a basketball board.

I came back to edit and got caught. Guess my credibility is shot too.

[abezontar]

It is the Princeton review.

And your harping on this Princeton Review "alternative lifestyle not an alternative" ranking is still a load of BS. First off, I graduated in '05 - I am basically part of the SMU that would have been rated by PR. Second, that ranking shows that there isn't a large culture group of 'alternative lifestyle' (which means many, many more things than gay) people at SMU. Not that these people face some sort of abuse or discrimination.

I was friends or acquaintances with at least 5 openly homosexual or bisexual individuals at SMU. Not one of them ever expressed any incidents of discrimination. I have personally asked two of them who were openly gay men, and would probably be perceived as such by an average person. They have confirmed they had no problems or incidents.

I was not part of Meadows, or any other unusual subset of SMU. The two individuals who's experiences I asked about were not part of Meadows or any special subset of SMU.

I'm sure there are people at SMU who choose to not associate with gays. So what? I choose to not associate with [deleted]. I also choose not to associate with Christian fundamentalists who feel the need to preach at others. I find both of those groups to be very annoying and unpleasant. I am not intolerant or discriminatory against those particular lifestyles when I need to interact with them.

This is a tough thing for any person or University that is caught up in this. AGAIN SMU IS CAUGHT UP. NOT UT, NOT GA. TECH, NOT ALA, Not OLE MISS, not Texas Tech, not Baylor. SMU is part of the UMC. PERIOD. Again, it is not those schools, because SMU does not have the same mission. I am sure that SMU is better than those Universities. Maybe you folks need to show the way? YOUR school is being sued. You and I, both know that Dallas is not a great place to be Gay. Niether is PHX. But it is what it is. SF was not a great place to be Gay. Your brothers and sisters and kids made it OK. (unless Harvey Milk or any # of those beaten to a pulp, blood all over was just a game, etc.) It happened. Could you folks in Dallas do what SF could not do, Could SMU stand up and say NO MORE. Could a southern school say no more? Should a Methodist School say NO MORE?

I'm not sure how you have come to the opinion that Dallas isn't a great place to be gay, but I have heard from individuals who are gay, and have moved to Dallas, that it many ways it is much easier to be openly gay in Dallas, and show affection publicly for their partner in Dallas than it was in New York City.

[Alaric]

I'm not sure how you have come to the opinion that Dallas isn't a great place to be gay, but I have heard from individuals who are gay, and have moved to Dallas, that it many ways it is much easier to be openly gay in Dallas, and show affection publicly for their partner in Dallas than it was in New York City.

Phxfan takes a LITTLE bit of anecdotal observance and makes some far reaching generalizations about SMU and Dallas. Pretty bigotted...