Yale students allowed to skip midterm test because of Trump win

[LordKiran]

I disagree.

I think moral lessons are valid lessons.

When your country is put into the hands of somebody who clearly used authoritarian and racist and xenophobic tactics and was vigorously supported by the most vile hate groups it may be time for reflection.

everybody.

The right to protest is inalienable but so is the right not to protest. The students who don't want to join shouldn't have to lose out on studies (if they consider this to be the case).

The professors concerned may be able to assign a stand-in or delay lessons to another day where lectures are not normally given. In such instances there's no problem with them taking time off class.

Is only allowing legal migrants in the country a 'racist' thing?

Hate to be technical, but losing out on a test isn't losing out on 'studies'

Studies include lectures, research,homework,class projects ect.

Tests are measures of the knowledge gained from 'studies'

So what they're offered isn't to miss out on learning but rather having their learning measured.

 

[blastula]

Complaints about something like this are premised on the idea that Trump was a normal candidate. He wasn't. He should not be be normalized.

 

[LordKiran]

Do you really understand what safe spaces and trigger warnings are?

If I was a college student today, I would personally demand a safe space and a trigger warning every time any progressive speaker comes to campus. I would do it to confuse those who provide safe spaces and trigger warnings. They must provide them because someone is asking for them, but I'm demanding it for something they consider completely safe and non-triggerable.

Trigger warnings exist for people who have been through psychological trauma. They dont or at least shouldn't exist to keep people from hearing something that conflicts with their moral values. So if it were my school I'd allow individuals to put trigger warnings on their own speaches but wouldn't endorse it or apply it on request from people not directly involved.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Is only allowing legal migrants in the country a 'racist' thing?

Depending on how the laws are written and applied, they can be very racist.

The USA allows people to apply for citizenship. Perhaps Americans can advise on how fair this system is. Maybe there are improvements that could be made. However the courts should have leeway to decide on a case by case basis.

However illegal immigrants are illegal if the laws that distinguish them from those who fulfil the legal requirements of entry.
Known criminals are not allowed entry and thus if they enter illegally they are illegal. Non criminals are also deemed illegal if they don't follow the law on entry to the USA. If there are unfair requirements in the law they need to be changed.

Persons seeking work should be illegal if they try to jump the queuing system by sneaking across the border.
Amnesties and promises of the same encourage this form of queue jumping.

Immigration policies in Asia and the Middle East are far stricter than those in Europe.

Are US policies on immigration fair?

From the point of view of preventing eventual overcrowding of the country and a strain on housing, healthcare (paid for and subsidized) would require a change.

Mexico allows immigrants but its laws seem quite strict but I don't think unfair.

http://www.tedmontgomery.com/remarks/10.1-6/ArizonaSB1070/MexicanImmigrationLaw.html

Illegal immigrants into Mexico face a 2 year jail term and a fine of 100,000 pesos.

In the US it seems to be 'racist' to deport known criminals who are not US citizens. Is it racist for Mexican authorities to fine and jail illegals. There are also still penalties for forged documents and it does not allow undocumented visitors.

 

[KeepTalking]

Depending on how the laws are written and applied, they can be very racist.

The USA allows people to apply for citizenship. Perhaps Americans can advise on how fair this system is. Maybe there are improvements that could be made. However the courts should have leeway to decide on a case by case basis.

However illegal immigrants are illegal if the laws that distinguish them from those who fulfil the legal requirements of entry.
Known criminals are not allowed entry and thus if they enter illegally they are illegal. Non criminals are also deemed illegal if they don't follow the law on entry to the USA. If there are unfair requirements in the law they need to be changed.

Persons seeking work should be illegal if they try to jump the queuing system by sneaking across the border.
Amnesties and promises of the same encourage this form of queue jumping.

Immigration policies in Asia and the Middle East are far stricter than those in Europe.

Are US policies on immigration fair?

From the point of view of preventing eventual overcrowding of the country and a strain on housing, healthcare (paid for and subsidized) would require a change.

Mexico allows immigrants but its laws seem quite strict but I don't think unfair.

http://www.tedmontgomery.com/remarks/10.1-6/ArizonaSB1070/MexicanImmigrationLaw.html

Illegal immigrants into Mexico face a 2 year jail term and a fine of 100,000 pesos.

In the US it seems to be 'racist' to deport known criminals who are not US citizens. Is it racist for Mexican authorities to fine and jail illegals. There are also still penalties for forged documents and it does not allow undocumented visitors.

So, is a law that requires people who look like illegal immigrants (Hispanics) to have proof of citizenship on them at all times so that they can be properly harassed by law enforcement, racist, or not racist?

The reason I ask is because Kris Kobach, who is on Trump's transition team, wrote exactly that law, and it was passed in Arizona before the SCOTUS shot it down as unconstitutional.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

If I was a college student today, I would personally demand a safe space and a trigger warning every time any progressive speaker comes to campus. I would do it to confuse those who provide safe spaces and trigger warnings. They must provide them because someone is asking for them, but I'm demanding it for something they consider completely safe and non-triggerable.

Trigger warnings exist for people who have been through psychological trauma.

I have. And I don't go through life saying "please don't hurt my tender feelings." The only time I've really let it impact my life was when I was called as a juror for a case of forced sexual activity with a minor. Having had experience with this as a minor, I told the judge that this would be difficult but if called I would perform my duty to the best of my ability.

I didn't say "oh gee, please protect me from even noticing that there are people with a difference of opinion" which is what happens today.

They dont or at least shouldn't exist to keep people from hearing something that conflicts with their moral values.

They shouldn't ... but they do.

So if it were my school I'd allow individuals to put trigger warnings on their own speaches but wouldn't endorse it or apply it on request from people not directly involved.

And, according to the current active model, if someone says "put a trigger warning on that" you are supposed to, which is why I'd be an epic troll by demanding it on all the speeches by those who advocate trigger warnings.

 

[Elixir]

... Kris Kobach, who is on Trump's transition team, wrote exactly that law, and it was passed in Arizona before the SCOTUS shot it down as unconstitutional.

Trump'll fix that once he gets David Duke appointed to the Court.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Depending on how the laws are written and applied, they can be very racist.

The USA allows people to apply for citizenship..

The USA has in the past forbidden people of certain races and countries of origin, entry, and citizenship. The Chinese Exclusion Act would be one example.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Do you really understand what safe spaces and trigger warnings are?

If I was a college student today, I would personally demand a safe space and a trigger warning every time any progressive speaker comes to campus. I would do it to confuse those who provide safe spaces and trigger warnings. They must provide them because someone is asking for them, but I'm demanding it for something they consider completely safe and non-triggerable.

I think by your response you don't know what these things actually are. Trigger warnings are especially important for people with PTSD as they can trigger memories and behaviors that can be destructive to the individual. They are not meant to protect people's feeling (as reported in the right-wing media), but to give warning that a materials are going to be presented that may trigger these behaviors.

- - - Updated - - -

And, according to the current active model, if someone says "put a trigger warning on that" you are supposed to, which is why I'd be an epic troll by demanding it on all the speeches by those who advocate trigger warnings.

Please link to this model. This is not something that is practiced in our university.

 

[Malintent]

The USA allows people to apply for citizenship. Perhaps Americans can advise on how fair this system is. Maybe there are improvements that could be made. However the courts should have leeway to decide on a case by case basis.

However illegal immigrants are illegal if the laws that distinguish them from those who fulfil the legal requirements of entry.
Known criminals are not allowed entry and thus if they enter illegally they are illegal. Non criminals are also deemed illegal if they don't follow the law on entry to the USA. If there are unfair requirements in the law they need to be changed.

Persons seeking work should be illegal if they try to jump the queuing system by sneaking across the border.
Amnesties and promises of the same encourage this form of queue jumping.

Immigration policies in Asia and the Middle East are far stricter than those in Europe.

Are US policies on immigration fair?

From the point of view of preventing eventual overcrowding of the country and a strain on housing, healthcare (paid for and subsidized) would require a change.

Mexico allows immigrants but its laws seem quite strict but I don't think unfair.

http://www.tedmontgomery.com/remarks/10.1-6/ArizonaSB1070/MexicanImmigrationLaw.html

Illegal immigrants into Mexico face a 2 year jail term and a fine of 100,000 pesos.

In the US it seems to be 'racist' to deport known criminals who are not US citizens. Is it racist for Mexican authorities to fine and jail illegals. There are also still penalties for forged documents and it does not allow undocumented visitors.

So, is a law that requires people who look like illegal immigrants (Hispanics) to have proof of citizenship on them at all times so that they can be properly harassed by law enforcement, racist, or not racist?

The reason I ask is because Kris Kobach, who is on Trump's transition team, wrote exactly that law, and it was passed in Arizona before the SCOTUS shot it down as unconstitutional.

The requirement for keeping Identification on you is a State law. Some States require you have Identification on you, and some do not.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

If I was a college student today, I would personally demand a safe space and a trigger warning every time any progressive speaker comes to campus. I would do it to confuse those who provide safe spaces and trigger warnings. They must provide them because someone is asking for them, but I'm demanding it for something they consider completely safe and non-triggerable.

I think by your response you don't know what these things actually are. Trigger warnings are especially important for people with PTSD as they can trigger memories and behaviors that can be destructive to the individual. They are not meant to protect people's feeling (as reported in the right-wing media), but to give warning that a materials are going to be presented that may trigger these behaviors.

Maybe I'm too old-school, but I don't demand everyone protect me from my PTSD. I don't say "it is your job to make sure I never am reminded in any way of bad stuff that happened to me".

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I don't demand that people do such things for me, but when they do such things for people, it shows compassion.