Links: Michigan Law students protest anti-gay commencement speaker
By Lina CanneyMay 11th, 2011, 6:42 pmComments (11)
Students at University of Michigan's law school walked out of their own commencement ceremony today to protest Senator Rob Portman's presence at their graduation. The students felt that Portman, who voted many times against equal rights for gay Americans, "should never have the opportunity to speak at Michigan Law. We are concerned about the message Michigan Law is sending by giving an anti-gay rights speaker the honor of marking what should be a joyful occasion for every member of the graduating class."
A new study in China suggests that endless dicking around on Facebook might not hurt students' achievements. In fact, it might help them. According to the study, "social-learning" correlates positively with "academic learning." So, uh, poke away.
Will Smith is pissing off residents of SoHo in New York, by parking his obscenely huge trailer in front of their houses.
And if you're still feeling a little angry about Michigan's choice to promote an anti-gay speaker, check out this link to get out some of that pent-up anger. Nerdy or not, we've all been burned by somebody — and this site will help you cope. Especially if you are a nerdy, male person.
Comments ( 11 )
My problem with this is that if somebody with a pro-gay agenda were to speak and students walked out because they disagreed with his views, those students would be bashed for being bigoted and haters. You can't have it both ways.
Incorrect. We're talking about rights, not opinions. The entire point of the Michigan Law students is that they're past agreeing/disagreeing with someone. It's about standing up to discrimination. A pro-gay agenda is anti-discrimination, an anti-gay agenda is discrimination. Done and dusted.
I shall be agreeing with uh, okay on this one. Your counter arguement, no, is the way it should be. What he said at first is the way it would be. The problem with your argument is that it is a two way road that you are deeming to be a one way street. Everyone has the right to their opinions, including something that goes against the very core belief of others.
I happen to be an openly supportive person for gay rights and wish nothing more than to see the LGBT community victorious in their fight. But, to think that the entire world is going to just roll over to something that they have instilled in their very core being and beliefs is a ludicrous thought process.
I could easily argue that an anti-gay agenda is discrimination against a whole other group of people. The best thing that could happen would be to see the LGBT's get their rights like everyone else without them shoving it down everybodies throats like the bible thumpers do with their religion.
Tolerance is all about turning your back on people you disagree with.
Jesus, did any of you actually read the article? The students expressly said that speakers, such as Senator Portman, SHOULD be welcomed on campus even if they have dissenting opinions. The students' point (amongst others) is that this is their graduation day, a day of celebration, and the event should not feature a keynote speaker who was in favor of discriminatory legislation. Considering law school costs about $125,000, it's kind of a slap in the face to the LGBT graduates.
yeah, I'm with uh, okay on this one, on merit. no's response presumes that a correct position exists which is, of course, his own. nice logic but not at all compelling.
First, I'm very proud of my new fellow-alumni for conducting their protest peacefully and respectfully. I'm told by a friend who was there that they walked out quietly before Portman spoke and returned quietly after he was done.
Second, the disconnect here between the two sides is the way they view the issues related to gay rights. Michigan Law has a long history of inviting political figures to give the commencement address -- last year, White House advisor and alumna Valerie Jarrett spoke, and no one complained. So the people who say that the political views of the speaker should not be an issue have a legitimate point from their perspective.
The protestors, by contrast, view the issue not as a political dispute, but as a human rights issue. To them, it's as if the school had invited a speaker who opposed "miscegenation." I suspect that in another decade or two, the vast majority of people will view it the same way. But right now, gay rights is in the process of transitioning from a political issue to a moral one in the national consciousness.
I can't wait until some of these new attornies silently walk out of a conference with a client because they disagree with their clients' view. They will get their ass fired and then they can live with their moral high ground in a van down by the river.
Actually, if you disagree that strongly with a client's position, you can simply refuse to take that client on. For example, King & Spalding fired John Boehner as a client for the DOMA defense case.
And it only cost them the best Supreme Court litigator in the country, who they had recently spend hundreds of thousands trying to hire. K&S still has enough money left over for a nicely appointed van, though.
lol, exactly. K&S' reputation has fallen significantly in the DC legal establishment. It probably would have gotten away with refusing to take the case in the first place but once a partner took the work on, it was obligated to represent.
Add a Comment