Thank you for the welcome! However it seems as if we disagree. Sinclair is one of those tricky public/private places. True it is funded primarily by taxpayer dollars, but disrupting the daily learning activities of students is clearly prohibited in the campus access policy.

http://www.sinclair.edu/about/offices/bus/campusaccess/index.cfm?searchTerm=campus%20rules%20for%20assembly

First Amendment
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

This group was not peacably assembled, it did not follow the rules that are available to anyone on their website, and it caused a great disturbance. Regardless of their message it is imperative that people be respectful of others. Planning an event that will not disturb students would be fantastic. I don’t care if Barack Obama himself came to campus, the rules must be followed. You draw a parallel to the Framers bucking the system. The Framers also owned slaves and denied women any rights. Does that mean it’s cool for me to start slappin around my girl and telling her she can’t vote? It was a time of revolution that eventually led to the supreme law in this country in which the powers were granted to the nation, states, and its people. Unless you are saying that the Constitution is old news and needs to be discarded, then I think you would agree that revolution is not necessary. Even if the purpose of this gaggle of retards was to bring about political revolution, their right to maintain a militia should be “well-regulated.” I don’t care if I absolutely LOVE the speakers message, song, or art of some sort, if you are causing a nuisance or endangering students, ya gotta go! Follow the rules, its not a revolution, it’s Christ. If you would have seen the crowd and the fashion in which they were organized you would agree that they were a problem. There was no focus, and at times the conversation was between 2-3 people while the horde was going crazy. The 2-3 people were having conversation that was inaudible to all, and it left the gathering with no leadership or order. If you want to “change” or make a difference you need focus or this sort of thing will happen.

Now should it ever become the case that unpopular groups are denied the right to march or rally, then sure, they should break the rules and insist upon their inalienable rights of assembly and free speech.  But I don’t think Sinclair’s policy is blanket denial of unpopular speech and assembly; instead they want some notice and organization.

@pizzabill: was this on topic enough?  I didn’t even use the word “gay.”  Doh!

If this is the opposition to Obama, he’s got nothing to fret.

I fully support an individual’s or a group’s right to freedom of speech. However, they have to follow the rules. There were about a hundred people or so gathered in the quad participating in this unorganized and poorly planned testification. There were people scattered about shouting back and for at one another, and in my opinion, they were all causing a great disturbance. Gatherings like this one need to be planned and organized. The young bearded man in the red shirt who appeared to be the “ring leader” was standing on the steps across from the crowd. He had little to no control over anything that was transpiring. People were walking back and forth and just shouting whenever they felt the need to agree or disagree. Believers and non-believers were both equally represented by the (expletive deleted) in the crowd, and I thought to myself that this could be a potentially dangerous situation. Excepting my potential clairvoyance, it only took common sense to see that the intermingled mess of angry young people wasn’t going to be pretty.

If this group had followed the rules this whole situation could have been avoided. The group and the students of all beliefs alike have the right to speak freely in a public place. The quad is not a public place. The campus is for prospective and current students, faculty, and alumni. If you wish to testify on behalf of your god, push your political beliefs, or sell your idea on plastic triangle widgets, there needs to be a time and a place so that people that do not wish to bear witness can choose to do so.  The unplanned chaotic nature of the event is what caused it to get out of hand.

I believe that this entire circus side-show was definitely a disturbance. I normally visit the quad between classes to read, write, or study. This gathering made that impossible. I did not wish to hear or see any of this. This group’s right to free speech ends where my right to enjoy the quad begin. Please plan your testimony better next time, and don’t force me to see and hear your message in a place where I pay to free my mind on my terms. I applaud that the group was exercising their right to free speech, but don’t do it in a wanton and disruptive fashion. Print flyers, write to The Clarion, and spread the word about where and when you will have your event. I won’t be attending.

True story: at my old campus, a bellowing faith preacher confronted two of my friends.  To the man: “YOU are a Homo-SEX-you-all!”  and to the woman “and YOU’VE been FORN-icating with him!”

Freedom of expression is one thing; damnable stupidity is another.  Why don’t we get some courage of our convictions and take on the established west end ministry for its intolerant gay-bashing instead of sticking up for the ephemeral rights of dimwits to disturb the peace?  After all, these ignoramuses (ignorami?) had been informed of the reasonable standards and chose to ignore them.  Let ‘em rot, says I.

Are we not to respond to one another’s comments?  If so, you shouldn’t have responded to mine.

How is David’s post a gay issue?  Your views on everything always twist to a gay issue.  You’re here, you’re queer.  We get it.  Many of us have no problem with that.  But for the love of Pete(er), please stick to the topic.

What is truly hysterical to me is that you get your panties all in a wad over something like this, yet you let important topics and concerns pass without comment. Surely that’s not an accurate reflection on your intellectual depth, is it? 

As for growing up a bit and tolerating people who may not like gay marriage, I’ve never called Miss California a bitch or verbally trashed her.  I have mocked her inept answer (don’t beauty pageant contestants know beforehand they’ll be called on to form coherent answers to questions, if not usually questions that are so controversial?). 

And tolerance does not call for me to refrain from pointing out the problems in the arguments people who don’t like gay marriage make.  For example, when Miss California says, “Unless we bring men and women together, children will not have mothers and fathers,” is it intolerant of me to say that Massachusetts and Canada seem to have no shortage of mothers and fathers despite having had gay marriage for some time now?

Intolerance would be to say Miss California has no right to her views or no right to speak, and I’ve never said that.  I’m glad Miss California’s out there saying the stuff she says.  It just shows that the anti-gay marriage folks really have nothing to back up their case.

I don’t even think straight men watch those things. Statistically straight woman and gay men watch these things, go figure.

Yes, a lot of liberals claim they are tolerant, and in fact with many things they are, but the minute a Miss California comes around the are not so tolerant, calling her a bitch and verbally beating her up. A tolerant person would respond to Miss California with something like, ” that is her opinion, I happen to disagree with her………” rather than call he a bitch. She could call gay people plenty of horrible names, but she remained professional and honest with an answer you did not like. I suggest you grow up a bit and be tolerant of people who may not like gay marriage. But it obvious this point can’t be understood by most – calling someone a bitch, verbally trashing her makes a person intolerant and therefore just as bad, if not worse in this case bc of the nasty tone, as the intolerant statement in the first place.

Most woman wish they looked liked Miss California, that is just a fact Jack.

Your President is the same way – say what is ever on your mind, be free with speech, so long as it agrees with the liberal agenda.

The Tea Party was given a bad name – Bill Maher more or less proclaimed these people as stupid bc he said they defended the rich yet they were not rich. And he continued to say everyone wants to be rich. Well, actually Bill, a lot of people are happy to voice their opinion against government and taxes and don’t necessarily have to be rich.  Government is a GD waste of time and money.  Freedom of speech, defended by the Left, only if you agree with the left. Now that is a GD joke.

Liberals are the ones who are not tolerant.