NUIG Suspends Legion of Mary over Leaflets

freedominacup · 06-12-2013 11:25AM

Daith wrote: »

Ok that's the issue. As an independent society they have the right. As a society on campus their rights come from the college itself. They don't have a right to do anything.

They are more than welcome to setup their own independent group if they want.

And the college itself need a better reason than "we don't like what they are saying", or the fact that a few students were upset by something to ban it.
College is about the interchange of ideas above all not just the promotion of certain viewpoints.

tigger123 · 06-12-2013 11:28AM

freedominacup wrote: »

That number of students should cowboy the f**k up.

How do you mean? They should be tougher and just take the homophobic sentiments on the chin?

Shenshen · 06-12-2013 11:28AM

freedominacup wrote: »

Here it is in a nutshell, everything that's wrong with Irish people who consider themselves "liberal". You think that a university of all places should stifle ideas and debate? Off all institutions anywhere in the country a university should encourage people to express their ideas. The loony ones like those expressed in the poster in the OP will very quickly be exposed for the nonsense they are but only if they are debated.

I would be regarded by many as conservative but I'm one person you could rely on to back you regardless of how distasteful I find your views if anyone/any authority tries to shut you down, unless you are actually inciting violence. So maybe I'm a bit liberal certainly a lot more liberal than the cretins who think shutting these people down is the correct course of action.

Well, I'm neither Irish nor would I call myself "liberal".
Yes, a university should encourage the exchange of ideas, and no, it should not value one opinion over another without reason or evidence.

But it also needs to ensure that the students attending can do so in a positive and encouraging atmosphere.
And it does have every right to not allow certain campaigns to take place within its walls if it feels that this will negatively affect their students.

_Redzer_ · 06-12-2013 11:30AM

cletus van damme wrote: »

I don't disagree much with you tbh.

But I think they are entitled to claim that being gay is somewhat negative - being critical of a section of society isn't a terrible thing.

They appear in the case to do it in a quite benign way - which is essentially my point I can't see it as harassment.

as for offering a service that mightn't work - they wouldn't be the only ones, in fairness.
Are we going to ban all cults / religious or Weight watchers(!) for false advertising?

I see your point. But NUIG allow a host of of varied groups to poster at will.
They singled this one cos the group don't agree with their ideals.

Saying "i'm don't think this life is a good one " is perfectly reasonable as it wasn't in an aggressive threatening manner.

If it's a gay rights Issue then I'd argue that for true gay rights - it has to happen naturally without enforcement and allow for people to be critical.

What if they were negatively screeching about black people being beneath them and not wanting them around. Would that be treated differently?

No it wouldn't be tolerated either because it's wrong. There's no difference between that example and the one in NUIG.

You can have an opinion, but your opinion can be wrong and you don't always get a right to air it to the deferment of others. I'd expect a pro-sexist and racist society to be shut down just as quickly.

Shenshen · 06-12-2013 11:31AM

Phoebas wrote: »

They're a public organisation, so they aren't (or at least shouldn't be) within their rights to restrict free speech.

Er... no, actually. As a public organisation, they are actually obliged to restrict free speech if it negatively affects people in their charge, in this case their students.

errlloyd · 06-12-2013 11:31AM

The problem is that while giving a small percentage of gay people the option to seek help in prayer, it is indirectly telling all the other gay people they have some sort of problem and they should be aiming to "fix" themselves.

With the massive level of depression in the same - sex community, it is really playing to the vulnerabilities of the most vulnerable students in the college.

Imagine beauty soc put up a poster advertising skin bleaching for black people. Something like "wanna feel beautiful, why not get your skin bleached?" now skin bleaching whitening is a pretty normal thing in certain parts of the world, but if you advertised it here it would be an indirect way of saying "being black is not okay, it's something you should try fix"

Daith · 06-12-2013 11:33AM

freedominacup wrote: »

And the college itself need a better reason than "we don't like what they are saying", or the fact that a few students were upset by something to ban it.

That's not their reason. They're actually reason is that it goes against Irish law and against the University's code of conduct.

http://www.thejournal.ie/galway-purity-society-suspended-1207203-Dec2013/

“NUI Galway is committed to protecting the liberty and equality of all students and does not condone such behaviour,” the university said in a statement.

“”NUI Galway has a pluralist ethos and will not condone the production and dissemination of any material by students which discriminates against other students. Discrimination or implied or direct harassment, on the basis of sexual orientation and/or religion, is contrary to Irish and European law.

“The Vice-President for the Student Experience initiated a process of enquiry to review the actions of the Society in question in the context of the University code of conduct, the University policy on harassment and Irish and European equality law.”

Dravokivich · 06-12-2013 11:33AM

freedominacup wrote: »

And the college itself need a better reason than "we don't like what they are saying", or the fact that a few students were upset by something to ban it.
College is about the interchange of ideas above all not just the promotion of certain viewpoints.

It's about specialising and gaining advanced knowledge of various subjects.

There also appears to have been further issues with this Legion of Mary group.

"As part of the application to become a fully-fledged society, its committee was asked to provide information as to its aims and objectives.

This did not happen. Concerns about the lack of clarification contributed to the decision to suspend the society. "

This isn't the battle of Freedom of Speech you make it out to seem.

_Redzer_ · 06-12-2013 11:33AM

freedominacup wrote: »

And the college itself need a better reason than "we don't like what they are saying", or the fact that a few students were upset by something to ban it.
College is about the interchange of ideas above all not just the promotion of certain viewpoints.

This is such an idiotic point. Should we all exchange ideas of racism and sexism too to promote certain viewpoints?

Eh, no.

freedominacup · 06-12-2013 11:36AM

tigger123 wrote: »

How do you mean? They should be tougher and just take the homophobic sentiments on the chin?

No that should be tougher and engage the fools expressing the homophobic sentiments head on and expose their nonsense for what it is rather than going running to mammy to complain about the bold girls hurting their feelings. They should have left that at home when packed their bags and headed for college.

Khannie · 06-12-2013 11:36AM

_Redzer_ wrote: »

Freedom of speech only works until somebody is starting to be negatively affected.

That's not true. Not at all. I believe that people are free to say things that I don't like, whether they upset me or not. My viewpoint is just that - a viewpoint. I can't say that it is categorically wrong to attempt to pray away the gay. I don't agree with it (it seems like nonsense), but that's just my viewpoint.

Khannie · 06-12-2013 11:38AM

_Redzer_ wrote: »

This is such an idiotic point. Should we all exchange ideas of racism and sexism too to promote certain viewpoints?

Yes. Yes we should. That way we can expose them for how ridiculous they are. What if someone decides it's time to ban something you feel strongly about? Who gets to decide what's OK to discuss and what's not?

_Redzer_ · 06-12-2013 11:40AM

Khannie wrote: »

That's not true. Not at all. I believe that people are free to say things that I don't like, whether they upset me or not. My viewpoint is just that - a viewpoint. I can't say that it is categorically wrong to attempt to pray away the gay. I don't agree with it (it seems like nonsense), but that's just my viewpoint.

"Woman belong in the kitchen and shouldn't be allowed to vote, their place is beneath their husbands".

"Black people are inferior and should be segregated from the rest of society".

Those opinions are very much wrong. If you're using your free speech to negatively impact somebody else you've lost that right, and nobody should put up with that.

Khannie · 06-12-2013 11:45AM

_Redzer_ wrote: »

"Woman belong in the kitchen and shouldn't be allowed to vote, their place is beneath their husbands".

"Black people are inferior and should be segregated from the rest of society".

Those opinions are very much wrong. If you're using your free speech to negatively impact somebody else you've lost that right, and nobody should put up with that.

Agree that these things are wrong. Disagree that anyone should lose the right to say things that you personally disagree with.

freedominacup · 06-12-2013 11:45AM

_Redzer_ wrote: »

This is such an idiotic point. Should we all exchange ideas of racism and sexism too to promote certain viewpoints?

Eh, no.

Eh, yes. Free speech is free speech. The only limit IMO is if the speaker/publisher is actually saying that certain groups are to be attacked. I have no interest in promoting racism, sexism or homophobia but I believe the only way to expose this type of nonsense for what it is, is to engage the promoters of it in debate.

You can convince yourself of your liberal credentials if you like but if you are in favour of censorship you're kidding yourself about where you actually stand.

Christy42 · 06-12-2013 11:46AM

Phoebas wrote: »

They're a public organisation, so they aren't (or at least shouldn't be) within their rights to restrict free speech.

So if someone were to campaign for black people to leave the college, nonviolently of course, that would be fine? Or what about a campaign for all size ten girls to start losing weight saying that is fat?

What the LOM did was bullying and hurtful. NUIG had every right and a duty to protect vulnerable students who could have been hurt by this campaign. Freedom of speech should never be a reason to allow bullying.

_Redzer_ · 06-12-2013 11:47AM

Khannie wrote: »

Yes. Yes we should. That way we can expose them for how ridiculous they are. What if someone decides it's time to ban something you feel strongly about? Who gets to decide what's OK to discuss and what's not?

All forms of racism and segregation are wrong. It's just that easy, because honestly it is ridiculous with no logical reason behind why you should permit that.

How is letting these people offer ways to pray the gay away exposing their ridiculousness? It's just doing harm more than anything and sending negative messages. There's no redeeming that at all or spinning it in a positive light.

I Heart Internet · 06-12-2013 11:48AM

NUIG and the Legion of Mary are right to be concerened about this and to investigate.

The LoM becasue a small, recently emerged (this LoM group was only founded last year it seems) has taken a solo run and endorsed some questionable (to say the least) campaign/organisation.

The NUIG becase this group appears to have no formal structure - may be just a bunch of trouble makers wanting to stir discord.

Khannie · 06-12-2013 11:48AM

_Redzer_ wrote: »

All forms of racism and segregation are wrong. It's just that easy, because honestly it is ridiculous with no logical reason behind why you should permit that.

How is letting these people offer ways to pray the gay away exposing their ridiculousness? It's just doing harm more than anything and sending negative messages. There's no redeeming that at all or spinning it in a positive light.

We're agreed on that. What we're disagreeing on is their right to make tools of themselves.

_Redzer_ · 06-12-2013 11:49AM

freedominacup wrote: »

Eh, yes. Free speech is free speech. The only limit IMO is if the speaker/publisher is actually saying that certain groups are to be attacked. I have no interest in promoting racism, sexism or homophobia but I believe the only way to expose this type of nonsense for what it is, is to engage the promoters of it in debate.

You can convince yourself of your liberal credentials if you like but if you are in favour of censorship you're kidding yourself about where you actually stand.

I hate how liberal is thrown around to dismiss any view as nonsense. It's quite pathetic in a debate tbh. I'm left centre and all my views are not just liberal.

Femme_Fatale · 06-12-2013 11:49AM

I think suspending the Legion Of Mary is a bridge too far. Removal of the message condemning homosexuality and implying it can be prayed away would be sufficient. People can go on about the latter being "fascist" and "suppression of free speech" (which tends only to be applied to stuff they disagree with) all they like, but misinformation is misinformation. Any incorrect/inaccurate message, including ones with a liberal slant, should be removed from the public domain.
And saying homosexuality is wrong might be just an opinion, but what about all of the gay people at whom it's aimed? They should be of higher priority than the "free speech" of those who condemn them. Very easy for someone who's not gay to say "they should cowby the f**k up".

However I do think NUIG is being quite ridiculous by droppiong Legion Of Mary as a campus society. A discussion with them rather than just getting rid of them would have been more productive, and less polarising.

freedominacup · 06-12-2013 11:49AM

Shenshen wrote: »

Well, I'm neither Irish nor would I call myself "liberal".
Yes, a university should encourage the exchange of ideas, and no, it should not value one opinion over another without reason or evidence.

But it also needs to ensure that the students attending can do so in a positive and encouraging atmosphere.
And it does have every right to not allow certain campaigns to take place within its walls if it feels that this will negatively affect their students.

No it doesn't have every right, it has a duty in some regard to prepare it's students for the real world and in the real world not everybody is nice and sometimes people are going to say and do things that you find upsetting. A little taste of this in the relatively benign surrounds of a university campus
where nothing extreme is likely to happen does no harm.

Shenshen · 06-12-2013 11:52AM

freedominacup wrote: »

No it doesn't have every right, it has a duty in some regard to prepare it's students for the real world and in the real world not everybody is nice and sometimes people are going to say and do things that you find upsetting. A little taste of this in the relatively benign surrounds of a university campus
where nothing extreme is likely to happen does no harm.

Yes, because this is what's going to happen once you leave college and start work - your colleagues will put up posters in the cantine and ask people to pray for you to turn straight.
Seen it hundreds of times.

freedominacup · 06-12-2013 11:53AM

_Redzer_ wrote: »

I hate how liberal is thrown around to dismiss any view as nonsense. It's quite pathetic in a debate tbh. I'm left centre and all my views are not just liberal.

I don't think liberal views are nonsense, just what passes for a liberal viewpoint in this country, which can be summed up as free speech for all as long as I agree with what they're saying. Everyone else can shut up.

Christy42 · 06-12-2013 11:55AM

freedominacup wrote: »

No it doesn't have every right, it has a duty in some regard to prepare it's students for the real world and in the real world not everybody is nice and sometimes people are going to say and do things that you find upsetting. A little taste of this in the relatively benign surrounds of a university campus
where nothing extreme is likely to happen does no harm.

If in a schoolyard a group of kids take a disliking to one and call him names, tell others to not hang around with him it is fine. None of the teachers should step in as it is just preparing them for real life as nothing extreme is going to happen in a school. This was bullying. Bullying should be punished. Hiding behind free speech should not allow it to go on. LOM was suspended which is fine, if they can show they are not just a bunch of trolls and will behave in future I am sure they will be brought back into the fold.

Khannie · 06-12-2013 11:56AM

freedominacup wrote: »

I don't think liberal views are nonsense, just what passes for a liberal viewpoint in this country, which can be summed up as free speech for all as long as I agree with what they're saying. Everyone else can shut up.

Agreed. I don't like everything about the US, but I think their viewpoint on freedom of speech is spot on. Sometimes it results in those scumbags that go around with the "god hates fags" banners (God damnit I really dislike them). That's a fairly hefty cost, but the benefit is that nobody's viewpoint is suppressed just because people don't like it.

GLaDOS · 06-12-2013 11:56AM

Khannie wrote: »

We're agreed on that. What we're disagreeing on is their right to make tools of themselves.

Do you think they should have the right to preach to people who might not be in the best place in terms of their mental health? We're talking about people who could be deeply confused about their sexuality, possibly worried about how their family/friends would react if they did come out as gay and these people basically want to tell them how wrong they would be if they came down on one particular side of the coin.

I think it's something that could be potentially devastating, even just to a single person. Whatever about free speech, there's an obligation to protect vulnerable people as well.

Shenshen · 06-12-2013 11:58AM

freedominacup wrote: »

I don't think liberal views are nonsense, just what passes for a liberal viewpoint in this country, which can be summed up as free speech for all as long as I agree with what they're saying. Everyone else can shut up.

Personal freedom ends where another person's freedom begins.
And making another person feel uncomfortable attending college courses unless they change their sexual orientation is in my view crossing the line.
I would have said the exact same thing about Muslim girls being targeted and asked to stop covering up.

There is such a thing as a reasonable debatte, and then there's bullying. The fact that the poster in question was passive-aggressive doesn't mean it was ineffective as a means to make people feel under pressure.

NTMK · 06-12-2013 11:58AM

Khannie wrote: »

We're agreed on that. What we're disagreeing on is their right to make tools of themselves.

They havent been banned from spouting this ****e they just have had there funding cut because the uni doesnt want to be associated with this. the can still hand out these leaflets and all the other nonsense that comes with it

They still have the right to make tools of themselves but it wont be with NUIG society funding anymore.

Dravokivich · 06-12-2013 11:59AM

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I think suspending the Legion Of Mary is a bridge too far. Removal of the message condemning homosexuality and implying it can be prayed away would be sufficient. People can go on about the latter being "fascist" and "suppression of free speech" (which tends only to be applied to stuff they disagree with) all they like, but misinformation is misinformation. Any incorrect/inaccurate message, including ones with a liberal slant, should be removed from the public domain.
And saying homosexuality is wrong might be just an opinion, but what about all of the gay people at whom it's aimed? They should be of higher priority than the "free speech" of those who condemn them. Very easy for someone who's not gay to say "they should cowby the f**k up".

However I do think NUIG is being quite ridiculous by droppiong Legion Of Mary as a campus society. A discussion with them rather than just getting rid of them would have been more productive, and less polarising.

It appears they were never fully setup as a soceity on campus and were in the process of doing that. But, LoM never provided NUIG with the full level of details needed to set up a soceity. Such as aims, objectives, goals and what services they looked to provide.

This is a matter of endorsing an organisation, not a freedom of speech issue. The posters were just a visible part of the issue to the students.

NUIG Suspends Legion of Mary over Leaflets

Comments