Two major thoughts have distilled themselves in my head

1) This man committed a crime, and if he’s been sentenced, has most likely paid society for that crime. That being said, he has to be able to work – earn his keep – in our society. What better place for him to work than a university? If he is a pedophile, there is no environment I can think of which is more likely to isolate him from young children. Most of the people who attend university are late teenagers – early twenties – too old for the target group, too young to have children in the target group. Therefore, there will be no exposure to his target group, yet he is gainfully employed. Am I missing something here?

2) I have always been under the impression that pedophaelia (sp?) and homosexuality were not related. That is to say, a man who is interested in a 16 year old girl is not sick, a man who is interested in an 8 year old girl is sick. In fact, most men are attracted to (but wouldn’t act on, just biologically attracted to) 16 year old girls. Most men are *NOT* attracted to 8 year old girls. Isn’t the same true for gay men wrt boys?

And NAMBLA was allowed to exclude people who like adults? shocking.

It’s Jason. Found out that you mentioned our interview again today. I read the comments and just wanted to let some folks know that some of the incidents they say Mike wrote about Chapel Hill, specifically concerning the Young Republicans, actually happened at the university that Mike and I are actually affiliated with, which is UNC-Wilmington (the Seahawks, not the Tar Heels).

Be blessed

Near as I can tell, I think for the thot process for Islamists: ‘The enemy of my enemy = my friend – till we’re done annihilating my enemies, then I’ll slit my “friends” like sheep in the slaughterhouse we built together’. That’s an example of a useful fool.

OTOH, for the Moonbat crowd, their thot process is similiar: ‘My enemy’s enemy (the oppressed) = my co-victimologists – till we’re done annihilating our enemy, then I’ll hope to hell that my support will suffice as ransom to their god (that I don’t even believe in), and they might call it even, Steven’. That my friend is the epitome of blind faith, bar none.

As for Actus, prosaic actup missives. Then again, maybe he truly doesn’t see it. Afterall the “written policy” is rather like the Cheshire Cat — a fictional cat with a broad fixed smile on its face. Like CC, the policy only reveals itself when useful, ie against conservatives, otherwise, all anyone sees is that smile. )

Where you got the notion that there is no written policy, I don’t know. But, the problem is that the policy as written is only enforced selectively, and based on the prejudices of some of the universities staff.
They froze the funds of a Christian group that refused to let non-Christians be board members, stating that the group violating diversity policy. They threatened the same to a republican club that didn’t want to let democrats hold leadership posistions within their club.

I think LB and myself have explained the quandry quite clear. These universities utilize their own diversity policies to stifle free speech. They allow free speech from groups that they approve, vs. free speech, period.

Oh. so there isn’t like a written diversity policy that is being applied here. I see. Just pedophilia baiting.

One of my very good friends (a university professor) was murdered last year (in a horrific gruesome way that still haunts me) by an assistant professor – who (now it turns out) had a long long line of arrests and restraining orders and convictions on his record. The pattern was completely visible in his record, but nobody checked it, apparently.

I am still baffled at how these people slip through.

Diversity in groups of peace indeed