Flags are Hate Speech at UC Irvine according to Associated Students council

Those who are elected tend to be the ones who are active, dare I say maybe in some cases activists. But unlikely people plan to elect “loonies”.

No, most people don’t vote at all. And, now most people are annoyed with the loonies. And, the two abstainers, too. Talk about chickens. But, nevermind. It will be vetoed. Still, it shouldn’t have happened.

The flags are only being taken down in the lobby of the student government (well not anymore since the bill will apparently be vetoed by the president). I would be surprised if a significant number of people ever entered the lobby of the student government, and I doubt anyone would even notice or care if this wasn’t such a big news story.

The reason it’s such a big news story is that people DO care.

That’s an important dimension of the story that people are missing: the priority of these elected representatives is interior decoration, rather thanaan issue that affects the greater student body.

How do you know who does and does not vote? Those who care about student government vote. And it’s unlikely they purposely vote in , as you call them," Loonies". Makes no sense.

http://news.uci.edu/briefs/uci-student-executive-council-vetoes-flag-resolution/

It’s vetoed.

No kidding. That has already been published. But the assertion that almost no one votes and that the student government is, in essence, a bunch of loonies is another ridiculous bunch of nothing but name calling and unsubstantiated opinion. . Waste of bandwidth .

Our tax dollars at work.

Onlynif you live in California :slight_smile:

It is a public university so I do believe federal money is involved and it is a school with a student population of around 30-thousand most of whom did not vote for, do not support, and did not care about these six hopelessly misguided students who passed this thing until it was big anti-flag news about their school.

Virtually every school has federal monies, loans, etc but this is largely a California issue.
When you assert things it as if its a known fact, and its nothing but, it just loses any credibility. If its your opinion, better to present it as such. And calling these students who are involved in student government "loonies: because you disagree with their bill, well thats insulting. Plenty of governmental bodies pass plenty of dumb bills. I may dislike the elected officials, but I would not call them “loonies”… Its rude.

In my opinion the six yes votes are loonies. Everything else I said which isn’t much is fact. And, we seem to now agree on the finances which is not my biggest issue. It’s just nonsensical student activism run amok. I guess that’s opinion but pretty widely shared since the veto announcement says the same thing mostly and uses misguided in place of looney. Whatever.

Its fact about how many voted, or that the students don’t care? I strongly disagree. Things asserted as “fact” are not. They are opinion. And without reading the bill that they passed and the reason they didn’t want any flags of any countries displayed in the student government lobby, I will reserve judgement about their persona. Have you read, before opining, the bill/ legislation they initially passed, or the reason or issues of discussion that up to its initial proposal? What if one of our esteemed cc colleagues is a parent of one of these students? The name calling is distasteful.

The vast majority of the students who care at all care that their school looks silly right now. And, of course I read it the bill and know what’s going on or I would not be commenting on it one way or another. That would be silly, too.

I don’t have any idea what you are disagreeing with, though.

Banning free speech in this country is “looney,” no doubt about it. If these six hate the flag so much, why didn’t they just take it down during their term, rather than ban it legislatively? From things described, no one would have noticed. Obviously, they want the attention and are trying to make a bigger statement. Banning the flag is looney.

Apparently you haven’t read the bill either. While I don’t agree with it or much of its verbiage or the recommendation, the intent was to PROMOTE free speech by removing what they felt were barriers to promote an open an inclusive space. They were proposing removing all flags from the area, not just the US flag. Opining about it without reading or understanding it is loony.,

I read it.

http://www.asuci.uci.edu/legislative/legislations/R50-70.html

Right, they think the flag is a form of hate speech and nope they get no points for good intentions.

Not believing either of you read the bill before posting loony posts. You 2 just have fun talking to each other about it. Nowhere does it say in the bill that the flag is a form of hate speech. This is ridiculous. You have fun on the playground.