Top Law Schools

SFrost wrote:Basically, they want the school to make a bunch of arbitrary changes to appease them or they threaten to break the law?

This doesn't bode well for their future as lawyers.

arklaw13 wrote:In other news, is there any particular reason why anyone AA would want to go to W&L?

arklaw13 wrote:In other news, is there any particular reason why an AA would want to go to W&L? I mean it's not like it's Bob Jones University, but still far from the most racially inclusive environment imaginable. I'm trying to imagine an AA & family vising W&L's campus. I can't do it.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

SFrost wrote:Basically, they want the school to make a bunch of arbitrary changes to appease them or they threaten to break the law?

This doesn't bode well for their future as lawyers.

I don't think the changes are really arbitrary.

SFrost wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

SFrost wrote:Basically, they want the school to make a bunch of arbitrary changes to appease them or they threaten to break the law?

This doesn't bode well for their future as lawyers.

I don't think the changes are really arbitrary.

They want to ban people from reenacting one of the most important events in our country's history, of which the school is named after a major figure of that event.

Maybe we have different definitions of arbitrary.

sunsheyen wrote:

SFrost wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

SFrost wrote:Basically, they want the school to make a bunch of arbitrary changes to appease them or they threaten to break the law?

This doesn't bode well for their future as lawyers.

I don't think the changes are really arbitrary.

They want to ban people from reenacting one of the most important events in our country's history, of which the school is named after a major figure of that event.

Maybe we have different definitions of arbitrary.

ar·bi·trary adjective \ˈär-bə-ˌtrer-ē, -ˌtre-rē\
: not planned or chosen for a particular reason : not based on reason or evidence

: done without concern for what is fair or right

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrary

SFrost wrote:

sunsheyen wrote:
ar·bi·trary adjective \ˈär-bə-ˌtrer-ē, -ˌtre-rē\
: not planned or chosen for a particular reason : not based on reason or evidence

: done without concern for what is fair or right

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrary

How convenient you leave off the part of the definition that completely supports me in this context:

1
: depending on individual discretion (as of a judge) and not fixed by law <the manner of punishment is arbitrary>

Even declaring something racist is a moral judgement (which are always arbitrary). Even worse, deciding specifically which racist things to ban in the south (there's a lot to choose from, trust me) makes it doubly arbitrary.

Let me reemphasize: these people have threatened civil disorder and law breaking to enforce their arbitrary demands upon an institutions tradition; traditions that were predictable and known before they joined.

SFrost wrote:

sunsheyen wrote:

SFrost wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote: I don't think the changes are really arbitrary.

They want to ban people from reenacting one of the most important events in our country's history, of which the school is named after a major figure of that event.

Maybe we have different definitions of arbitrary.

ar·bi·trary adjective \ˈär-bə-ˌtrer-ē, -ˌtre-rē\
: not planned or chosen for a particular reason : not based on reason or evidence

: done without concern for what is fair or right

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/arbitrary

How convenient you leave off the part of the definition that completely supports me in this context:

1
: depending on individual discretion (as of a judge) and not fixed by law <the manner of punishment is arbitrary>

Even declaring something racist is a moral judgement (which are always arbitrary). Even worse, deciding specifically which racist things to ban in the south (there's a lot to choose from, trust me) makes it doubly arbitrary.

Let me reemphasize: these people have threatened civil disorder and law breaking to enforce their arbitrary demands upon an institutions tradition; traditions that were predictable and known before they joined.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Why shouldn't a school get challenged on its current, present day, racist dressings of history? That's seriously not arbitrary, however much you want to play around with the word.

SFrost wrote: Yes, obviously by appropriately classifying the perception of racism as arbitrary I am condoning racism. (Note obvious sarcasm for the lack of reading comprehension in this thread).

We can make very strict or very liberal definitions to the term racism.

In college, I learned in an evolution class that racism was "the belief in the inherent genetic superiority of one race over another".

In a human rights class I learned that racism was prejudice based on race in combination with power/institution.

More recently, a feminist tried to convince me that racism included just about everything males have ever done to females.

Which one is right? I won't try to convince anyone, we all have our own experiences and worldviews. I have my own definition, I can tell you that much. Ultimately, though, any definition I pick and any you do are all equally arbitrary. The word itself is not restricted by any universal law. The scope, degree, and limits we place on any particular definition are also arbitrary.

Wrapping up with my original point: going back to any historical figure pre-1900 the vast majority would probably meet our definition of racism. Even people fighting for emancipation largely believed in white superiority (in the US). They believed in equality under the law and before God, not in innate ability. We have the benefit in 2014 of a more enlightened and scientifically-accurate understanding of race (largely by way of genetics). Most historical figures were probably very racist and contributed in some way to oppressive acts. Do we issue a blanket ban on all traditions dealing with history?

You go to school in the south you better be ready for some history and tradition that has racist dressings. If you go to a school named after a god dang Confederate general ... lol.

SFrost wrote:
My main sticking point was the Civil War reenactment.

Show me the proof that interest in the Confederate side of the Civil War = racism. Any proof you provide I would also like it explained how that link is not arbitrary

I don't agree that students should be able to dictate what history others are allowed to appreciate because of perceived offense.

Here's a public service announcement while we're at it: stay out of the South. Seriously, it's the worst part of America.

SFrost wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Why shouldn't a school get challenged on its current, present day, racist dressings of history? That's seriously not arbitrary, however much you want to play around with the word.

My main sticking point was the Civil War reenactment.

Show me the proof that interest in the Confederate side of the Civil War = racism. Any proof you provide I would also like it explained how that link is not arbitrary

I don't agree that students should be able to dictate what history others are allowed to appreciate because of perceived offense.

Here's a public service announcement while we're at it: stay out of the South. Seriously, it's the worst part of America.

moonman157 wrote:I'm all about schools making changes to be more inclusive and promote a comfortable environment for everyone, but the fact that the school is named after Robert E. Lee isn't exactly something you first find out about once you're there. If you don't want to go to a school named after a Confederate general (and I would certainly not blame anyone who didn't, or anyone who doesn't want to go to a school with W&L's employment numbers) then don't go to W&L

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

moonman157 wrote:I'm all about schools making changes to be more inclusive and promote a comfortable environment for everyone, but the fact that the school is named after Robert E. Lee isn't exactly something you first find out about once you're there. If you don't want to go to a school named after a Confederate general (and I would certainly not blame anyone who didn't, or anyone who doesn't want to go to a school with W&L's employment numbers) then don't go to W&L

I get this, but I don't think it's entirely fair. I don't think deciding to go to a school means you have to accept everything about it wholeheartedly, and there may be a lot of reasons why W&L is a good choice for someone otherwise.

moonman157 wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:

moonman157 wrote:I'm all about schools making changes to be more inclusive and promote a comfortable environment for everyone, but the fact that the school is named after Robert E. Lee isn't exactly something you first find out about once you're there. If you don't want to go to a school named after a Confederate general (and I would certainly not blame anyone who didn't, or anyone who doesn't want to go to a school with W&L's employment numbers) then don't go to W&L

I get this, but I don't think it's entirely fair. I don't think deciding to go to a school means you have to accept everything about it wholeheartedly, and there may be a lot of reasons why W&L is a good choice for someone otherwise.

True, there may be very personal reasons for going to W&L. And like I said, I can see wanting to address things like the comments professors make, the approach to certain sensitive topics, institutional support for minority voices or a greater promotion of diverse events and student groups are all goals worthy of championing. Maybe it's not just the fact that they're trying to get the university to renounce their namesake, it's that they're threatening civil disobedience if their demands aren't met by a certain deadline. That's an incredibly drastic response to a situation you knew you were entering when you enrolled.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
Edited to add: I get the argument that civil disobedience isn't the right response, but I think that's a different argument from whether it's legit (or abitrary!) to challenge some of the practices at the school.