Hey, there! Log in / Register
Massachusetts colleges begin to tell prospective students that being disciplined for anti-gun walkouts won't count against them
By adamg on Thu, 02/22/2018 - 11:45pm
Officials at MIT and UMass Amherst said today that high-school students shouldn't worry about their admission status if their high schools discipline them for walking out of class in anti-gun protests.
Stu Schmill, MIT's dean of admisssions, wrote a detailed explanation today, but summed up:
We have already informed those who asked that, in this case, a disciplinary action associated with meaningful, peaceful participation in a protest will not negatively impact their admissions decision, because we would not view it as inappropriate or lacking integrity on its face.
The UMass admissions office wrote:
Students: If you participate in peaceful protests against gun violence and receive school discipline for walking out, staging your protest, etc., please rest assured that you can report it to UMass Amherst, and it will not affect your admission decision.
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
The MIT statement is better
In that it at least attempts to not be partisan.
Are you implying that
Are you implying that gun violence is a partisan issue? That perhaps one party is more interested in doing something about it? That the other party's history of enabling mass murder is deserving of respect?
I do not find the MIT statement to be more general. It starts off with "in this case," and approves of "meaningful" protest, reserving the right to define what protest is meaningful.
Partisan
Yes, the facts and reality crown against the thoughts, prayers, and toxic fantasy crowd.
I'm outright stating
that blaming law-abiding people for the misbehavior of a small minority is nothing other than a partisan exercise.
In the particular and very narrow context of this post and the one you're replying to I am saying nothing about "gun violence."
So, you're ranting about something else
Since neither of the U statements blamed anyone for anything, your "not saying anything about gun violence" means you're just spewing opinion about something that isn't within the particular and very narrow context of this post.
It's telling...
That opposing gun violence seems partisan these days.
Not
"opposing gun violence."
More like disregarding people's rights because a tiny minority of the population can't exercise them responsibly.
Wow
Talk about moving the goalposts. You're trying to put them on a baseball field. Gun violence is what this thread, and the protests that prompted the university statements are about. Your tender sensibilities about your death-machine fetish are making you unhinged.
Must be nice to get to
Must be nice to get to redefine what other people are protesting. Kids are saying they want to stop living in fear of getting mowed down in a bloodbath of bullets and you decide they're protesting your rights. Not any different than football players kneeling to protest institutional racism and the right redefines it as disrespecting the flag and/or the troops.
My liberal friends
used to object to George W referring to a "War on Terror" or a "War on Terrorism" on the grounds that both terror and terrorism are abstract concepts. That declaring war on them amounted to declaring an open-ended military engagement with ill-defined objectives and ill-defined enemies, leaving lots of wiggle room for power-hungry sophists to define anything they didn't like as "terror" or "terrorism." I argued back that right after 9/11, we all knew what we were talking about and the rhetoric was less important than the substance.
Since then, I've grown to appreciate the other side. Rhetoric is not everything, but it can be important, especially when the calls to action can range from nothing to full-on erosion of specifically-enumerated protections in the Constitution.
So while I fully appreciate (and in fact share) these kids' want (I'd go so far as to call it a need) to not have to fear a maniac shooting them up when they're going about their business, it needs to be more than a primal scream or the most extreme caricature of a policy proposal for me to take it as a serious political position.
Very pleased with the MIT statement
It does not limit itself to this particular walk-out or issue but makes it clear that the school supports students getting involved in causes, and discusses why this is important.
I hope other colleges, locally and nationally, follow suit.
What about MIT smashing Senior House?
Students protested peacefully, such as by publishing opinions, and getting journalistic coverage.
MIT officials' response was to call that improper, and escalate the action against Senior House, punitively.
MIT is jumping on the social responsibility bandwagon, but take it with a grain of salt, until the irresponsible officials "resign". You don't think they just made a mistake, not are even worse than the norm at being responsible? "Worse than the norm, but we'll thin-tweed-line it" isn't a motto of MIT.
Seriously? Senior House being
Seriously? Senior House being disbanded is on the same level as gun violence? Check your privilege.
No, gun violence is different
But MIT disconnect between say and do is a problem, and it will indirectly affect everyone.
Don't tell strangers to check their privilege. It's lazy and counterproductive.
Just don't post any dankmemes
Just don't post any dankmemes to Facebook like these clowns.
What if your grade is effected......
Some schools dock a grade for a skipped class, I'm guessing the applicant would simply need to explain it.
Also, not to be a jerk, but who is going to be the first "oh, if this was (this group) protesting, colleges wouldn't do this, but since it was (this group), I guess it's ok)
# (insert group) privilege....
It's more likely that your
It's more likely that your grade in English class will be AFFECTED if you keep using words incorrectly.
One's grade is always effected.
Whether or not it's affected would be the particular cause for concern.
Missing class could in fact
Missing class could in fact effect an effect on one's grade, which in turn might affect one's affect.
Somehow I doubt this applies to conservative causes.
A walkout to protest taxpayer funded abortion?
A walkout in support of the Second Amendment?
A walkout favoring the repeal of the "Bathroom Law"?
A walkout in support of the free speech rallies on Boston Common that garnered so much negative media attention?
so you're saying
wanting to prevent children being murdered in schools is a "liberal cause"
okey dokey, ill jump on that bandwagon. call me a liberal.
shame the conservatives couldn't get in on this pro-life agenda.
False dichotomy
Grabbing everyone's guns is a leftist cause.
Safety of schools and other public and private buildings is not a partisan issue. Proposed means to those ends are very much subject to partisanship. I truly hope people actually understand that distinction.
Who’s grabbing everyone’s
Who’s grabbing everyone’s guns? Show your work.
Sure
Whatever you say. That's why the
liberalConservative Prime Minister of Australia led the initiative to remove guns from their society, resulting in their having zero mass shootings since he did it. Maybe if you took your face out of Wayne LaPierre's crotch, you'd be able to see that lots of conservatives in the US are also fed up with the results of loose gun control.time was
the NRA and its members advocated for responsible gun ownership and sensible gun laws.
now they scream "they grabbin er gunz!" when what most people want is, again, and I'm not sure how much more clear I can make this - protect children in the places where they study and should feel safe.
once again, if that makes me a liberal, sign me up.
Lets be consistent, Anon
What about:
A walkout to protest killing children by taking away their health care?
A walkout to protest killing mothers and children by defunding prenatal care?
A walkout to protest killing elderly and disabled citizens by looting social security and taking away health care that they worked for?
A walkout to protest the death penalty?
Nothing wrong with any of those causes
If the protests are peaceful. That matter but might be hard if you're accusing people of murder for their stances on fiscal matters. Then it could bump up against being "fighting words." But you'd never go there, would you?