Here is the video of the arrest.


Rick Duncan 
Welpton Professor of Law 
University of Nebraska College of Law 
Lincoln, NE 68583-0902


"And against the constitution I have never raised a storm,It's the scoundrels 
who've corrupted it that I want to reform" --Dick Gaughan (from the song, 
Thomas Muir of Huntershill)

--- On Thu, 5/13/10, hamilto...@aol.com <hamilto...@aol.com> wrote:

From: hamilto...@aol.com <hamilto...@aol.com>
Subject: Re: A real-life on-campus example
To: religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
Date: Thursday, May 13, 2010, 11:04 AM



Rick-- This strikes me as your desired interpretation of the law, not the law 
as it stands.  






 and it does not reflect the case.  Yours and CLS's reasoning leads to an 
absolutely absurd result.


 


  When we have a court telling a university or law school that it cannot 
require all school-supported groups to include all students (if any student 
desires), as part of a mission to create open dialogue, then we might as well 
hand in our tenure and the academic freedom attached to it.  As I said at the 
start, CLS's position is deeply anti-intellectual and requires one to buy into 
a Balkanized view of the universe.


Years ago, I taught a seminar in Budapest with students from the Balkans.  They 
described the disintegration of a shared culture this way.  "It used to be that 
when you got on the subway or the train, everyone was a fellow citizen, not a 
Jew or a Christian or a Muslim.  Everyone shared some common ground and people 
were polite to each other regardless.  Then, the disintegration started and 
people became very conscious of the religious identity of the person across the 
aisle and seated next to them.  Once that crept into the mindset, you became 
very uncomfortable seated next to someone of a different religion, you 
distrusted other believers automatically, as part of the culture."  I will 
never forget their sense of loss or their sincerity.  I think CLS's position 
(as well as Wide Awake's position in Rosenberger) as being a step in that 
direction.  In this era, we need far more effort to find common ground and ways 
for different believers to speak
 to each other.  Exclusion in the academic context, where there is supposed to 
be wide-ranging, challenging discourse, seems precisely the wrong move.


 


Marci






-----Original Message-----

From: Rick Duncan <nebraskalawp...@yahoo.com>

To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics <religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu>

Sent: Thu, May 13, 2010 12:51 pm

Subject: RE: A real-life on-campus example









Chip, the problem with the all comers policy, even if applied across the board, 
is that it entirely destroys the ability of student expressive groups to 
organize around a set of beliefs and viewpoints. It is not viewpoint 
discriminatory (if applied to all), but it destroys all attempts to organize on 
the basis of viewpoint and belief.



It is like a rule that says no one can engage in speech on public sidewalks. 
Such a rule completely eliminates free speech in a public forum, even though it 
doesn't discriminate on the basis of viewpoint.



If CLS and all other student expressive groups have a right of expressive 
association concerning their membership policies, Hastings violates that First 
Amendment right by demanding that it be waived as a condition of access to a 
limited public forum. Such an unconstitutional condition is also an 
unreasonable restriction in light of the purpose of the forum (which is to 
create a marketplace of ideas for student group expression).



Rick







Rick Duncan 

Welpton Professor of Law 

University of Nebraska College of Law 

Lincoln, NE 68583-0902






"And against the constitution I have never raised a storm,It's the scoundrels 
who've corrupted it that I want to reform" --Dick Gaughan (from the song, 
Thomas Muir of Huntershill)











_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.




-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.


      
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to