Posted on 02/11/2009 5:24:20 PM PST by pissant
I write today regarding the College's decision to invite a particular speaker to our campus. This decision to invite her on behalf of the College is one that involves our whole campus and signals that we as a whole will receive her openly.
Unfortunately, I am certain she will not receive many of us so kindly. I'm speaking of Ann Coulter, and I am advising you to rescind her invitation.
The United States is a nation that prides itself on acceptance and diversity and refuses to accept any less. The same holds true for the College. We are proud of the fact that ethnically diverse students comprise more than one third of our campus population, that 60 percent of our students are females and that we have a multiplicity of students of different religions, political views, abilities and sexual orientations.
Yet, Coulter has insulted people in each of these groups. On women, she has said, "It would be a much better country if women did not vote."
On Muslims, she has said, "News magazines don't kill people, Muslims do."
On homosexuals, Coulter has said, "I thought gays just wanted to get married to one another and settle down in the suburbs so they could visit each other in the hospital."
On Judaism, Coulter has said, "We just want Jews to be perfected."
The list of her odious quotations continues, and while she may not have been talking to students at the College, she was certainly talking about them. She has insulted the majority of our students directly and the remainder of us by extension because those whom she insulted are our friends.
Coulter has insulted our intelligence, and she has denigrated the work of those who strive for tolerance and equality. Her appearance encumbers all that the College has striven for in its implementation of courses and educational events on race, religion, homosexuality, gender equality and differing abilities.
How can we reconcile our attempts to shape a new generation of students who are tolerant, accepting and aware of those who are different from us when we invite as a guest a person who refers to our students as she does?
Coulter is no more welcome here than would be any other racist or sexist or homophobe. Yet, we are welcoming her to the College and embracing her visit with one the campus' largest venues, Kendall Hall.
My question is this: What does it say to our students by inviting her here, someone who has at one point or another blatantly insulted at least half of those enrolled here? Even more fundamentally, what does it say about us?
Liberal DemocRATS will not tolerate free speech. They’re big into censorship!
Tolerance is such a one sided thing.
The love affair with tolerance and diversity ends in Communism, Ann Coulter just points out that fact and the blinded sheeple continue to ignore facts.
Ignorant people...
Not one thing quoted has anything to do with “race”
Typical of those suffering from a vowel shortage, Br’r Kowalczyk needs first to think about assimilating to this country rather than the magic land in his mind where everybody is a gay Negro from Tehran.
How did the College of New Jersey do in football?
What is “The Signal” and what “College” is it and where is it? Very frustrating post!
People like that are exactly the reason they need Ann on campus.
The "even playing field" looks a little tilted here.
In many cases it would be better if women did not vote. They vote their feelings. Feelings is hardly what government should be concerned about. It’s not the job of government to feel. government is not parent. It is not spousal supporter. It is not dad to your kids. It is not your sole benefactor.
And I would also expound on the statement by saying given voting by emotion and feelings, that many of today’s metrosexual men should not be allowed to vote either.
It may be time to only allow property owners to vote. After all they are the ones being taxed to death to pay for all these government giveaways.
I think she’d prefer Al Sharpton.
Or perhaps she could oppose Coulter until that “white embraces what’s right.”
So then, every comic in America woulod be banned from the campus as well.
Any guy who has “Loretta” as his middle name has more problems than worrying about Ann Coulter coming to town.
“My question is this: What does it say to our students by inviting her here, someone who has at one point or another blatantly insulted at least half of those enrolled here? Even more fundamentally, what does it say about us?”
My question is, why do you raise the specter of censorship and offense when a conservative comes to campus, yet raise no such objections when liberal extremists who offend large percentages of students and faculty come to speak? Why are you such a blatant hypocrite?
click on the link
Mike the idiot then goes on to create a whole column stating why Ms. Coulter should be banned from speaking because she pissed him off. How myopic, pathetic and hysterical. Wonder if he's gay?
And just so you know, I know you didn’t write it, I was responding to the writer of the piece, not you personally.
“...Even more fundamentally, what does it say about us?...”
It says that 1) you are pursuing a worthless degree in some sort of underwater basket weaving, 2) you will gain this degree, then work for McDonalds, and 3) then complain to the Obamaloon that you aren’t getting rich.
In short, you are poorly educated, and are destined to become another worthless t*rd in the toilet of society. In other words, you will be a prime candidate for congress (like a certain president).
Mike Kowalczyk Student Representative kowalcz2@tcnj.edu
With a first name of Mike and a middle name of Loretta, what is this critter?
Ha! Gotta love how Coulter baits the libtards into giving her free publicity and cred! They’re too dumb to learn, herd animals that they are. If they were smarter, it would gall them to know they’re punching her meal ricket.
It used to be called Trenton State, my sister graduated from there.
It used to be called Trenton State, my sister graduated from there.
And she's hit the nail on the head with each swing Mikey.
Well put. Make sure to email that to this personage.
No, I’ll keep my rights, thanks. If straight men could vote with their heads, we wouldn’t be dealing with President Zero, would we?
Thanks for the link. I sent loretta a nice note thanking her/him for his/her intolerance and praising the dip skit for stopping free speech.
hehe
Mike Loretta Kowalczyk
Princeton sued them because they were the original "College of New Jersey" (even though they hadn't used the name since Woodrow Wilson's day).
TCNJ doesn't sound like a very pleasant place, but it is nice that they won the law suit against the big boys.
Interesting. I am guessing the other two-thirds of the students are devoid of any ethnic background. < /sarcasm>
what does it say
this
you do not like folk who represent an idea or view which is not the same as yours .
You harp on about your precious diversity and yet you do not understand diversity is not just based on color or religion but also based on views.
So the next time you harp on about tolerance remember it is you who is the most intolerant people in this country
In many cases it would be better if women did not vote. They vote their feelings. Feelings is hardly what government should be concerned about.
Right on! The ladies should absolutely not decide who should run this great country for that very reason. Obama is a not-so-smooth talking buffoon that captured the hearts of the feel-good mentality of so many women. I’ve found that about 1 in 5 actually think more than they feel. That’s okay in the bedroom but not when choosing a leader.
guarantee he’s a raving homo
How can we build a tolerant society if we have to let just anyone speak?
How can we shape a new generation of students who are accepting of the differences in people if we let in people who don’t agree with us?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFBOQzSk14c
JUDITH:
I do feel, Reg, that any Anti-Imperialist group like ours must reflect such a divergence of interests within its power-base.
REG:
Agreed. Francis?
FRANCIS:
Yeah. I think Judith’s point of view is very valid, Reg, provided the Movement never forgets that it is the inalienable right of every man—
STAN:
Or woman.
FRANCIS:
Or woman... to rid himself—
STAN:
Or herself.
FRANCIS:
Or herself.
REG:
Agreed.
FRANCIS:
Thank you, brother.
STAN:
Or sister.
FRANCIS:
Or sister. Where was I?
REG:
I think you’d finished.
FRANCIS:
Oh. Right.
REG:
Furthermore, it is the birthright of every man—
STAN:
Or woman.
REG:
Why don’t you shut up about women, Stan. You’re putting us off.
STAN:
Women have a perfect right to play a part in our movement, Reg.
FRANCIS:
Why are you always on about women, Stan?
STAN:
I want to be one.
REG:
What?
STAN:
I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me ‘Loretta’.
REG:
What?!
LORETTA:
It’s my right as a man.
JUDITH:
Well, why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?
LORETTA:
I want to have babies.
REG:
You want to have babies?!
LORETTA:
It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.
REG:
But... you can’t have babies.
LORETTA:
Don’t you oppress me.
REG:
I’m not oppressing you, Stan. You haven’t got a womb! Where’s the foetus going to gestate?! You going to keep it in a box?!
LORETTA:
[crying]
JUDITH:
Here! I— I’ve got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans’, but that he can have the right to have babies.
FRANCIS:
Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother. Sister. Sorry.
REG:
What’s the point?
FRANCIS:
What?
REG:
What’s the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he can’t have babies?!
FRANCIS:
It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.
REG:
Symbolic of his struggle against reality.
Um, that you're tolerant of the views of others in a free society? Oh, that's right, it's only when the views agree with your own that you're tolerant.
TCNJ is supposed to really be improving academics wise, you have these types on every college.
I wonder if they teach what “out of context” means anymore? It seems liberals are unable or unwiling to understand the concept.
I made SURE my children know it- so they can spot the pitfalls.
I told them this: “If you get bad grades and think we are going to florida then you are sadly mistaken.” Out of context would be hearing only the words “we are going to florida”
They got BOTH messages.
“In many cases it would be better if women did not vote. They vote their feelings. Feelings is hardly what government should be concerned about”
The correct wording of your sentence should be “Feelings ARE hardly...”. But besides that, your comment is ignorant and insulting. Can you imagine, for example, Condoleeza Rice not voting? How about Sarah Palin? I would like to think you’re joking, but I somehow doubt it. There are plenty of tough women right on this board.
Liberals are for diversity in everything except diversity of opinion. Their idea of diversity on campus is a faculty with only one conservative professor. Through some strange alchemy of time liberals have become the most intolerant ideologues on earth, save a few Islamic extremists (say, one billion, perhaps).
“My question is this: What does it say to our students by inviting her here, someone who has at one point or another blatantly insulted at least half of those enrolled here? Even more fundamentally, what does it say about us?”
It says that somewhere, somehow, there are folks who believe you can tolerate an opinion differing from your deep indoctrination without peeing in your pants. It says that there is this system of thinking called “rationality”, that, while it calls upon you to do the arduous work of utilizing some of those neurons allegedly being cultivated between your ears, does not rely upon your fearfully rejecting any differing opinion by reflexively calling it “racism” as a crude defense mechanism. Indeed, it is just a variation of the “tolerance” you speak of, except of a different opinion than one you may now have. And the idea is that by using those neurons, like biceps and leg muscles, over time and with continued use, you might just become what we call a “thinking person” instead of a victim of your own fearful reactions. And developing this trait in you is the general idea of why your parents spend between $6,000 and $40,000 a year sending you to an institution of higher learning. See how it works?
The bottom line is: There are those who have more faith in your inherent intellectual worth than you yourselves do. This function is called “learning”, and one of the prerequisites to this learning is that you cease believing that you, at your just-over-pubescent age, have all the answers. You’ll just have to take that part on faith. And it may be uncomfortable for a minute, this mental expansion opportunity you’re being afforded, but many people before you, for thousands of years, have gone to schools, advanced their educations, and bettered themselves. Now, isn’t America great, to give you that special chance? How’d you like to be a part of it or what it could be if it wasn’t filled with fearful drones who cannot think for themselves?
Oh cry me a river, Loretta.
This is America, deal with it. And we won’t be silenced especially during this administration.
So grow a thicker skin or get psychotherapy.
Nobody ever pays attention to those guest speakers on college campus anyway. At least I never did.
I take that back. I went to see carrot top when he came to my campus. But that was just to make fun of him. He was still skinny back then.
By being tolerant and accepting of Ann Coulter. Who is definitely different than you and your gay friends.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.