The Red and Black

Originally posted by

Daniel

To "Adams is crap":
1. It's innocent until proven guilty, buddy.
2. The Anita Hill situation happened almost two decades ago, and there haven't been any other accusations against Thomas. Doesn't seem like a pattern does it?
3. If Bill Clinton, who has a pattern of sexual harassment in his resume, were invited to speak, I think I would be supportive of having a President at UGA anyway. Would you?
4. Thomas is a SUPREME Court Justice. That's prestigious if you didn't know.
5. You say the majority of Bulldog Nation is against Thomas, but I beg to differ. Everyone who is against him being a speaker is speaking out, and the ones who support Thomas are not speaking because they don't need to yet. I think if you took an accurate poll of students and alumni, you'd find that a majority either want Thomas here or don't care because they sadly don't know anything about his fine career. I think almost everyone who hates Thomas is making their opinion known, and the silent majority, besides me and a few others, is ignoring you.

Originally posted by

Janet Frick

President Adams, you had an opportunity at the University Council meeting yesterday to set the tone for how discourse about controversial opinions will be handled. I expected you to stand by your decision to invite Justice Thomas. I also expected you to be respectful of the faculty and students who have expressed opposing opinions. Instead, you took it upon yourself to ignore our own stated reasons for opposing his invitation (the ironic timing given his controversial involvement in alleged sexual harassment) and claim that our opposition is politically motivated. If we were opposed to him on purely political grounds, why didn't we protest all of his other recent appearances on campus? If we were opposed to conservative speakers, why didn't we protest the graduation speech by Governor Sonny Perdue, for example?

Further, you admonished us "not to embarrass ourselves" at graduation, presumably by making any type of public protest. (For the record, I am not aware of any plans to disrupt graduation -- I believe that would be inappropriate and disrespectful to students). However, I must ask -- do you consider it "embarrassing" when faculty and students exercise their right to free speech and oppose a decision you have made? I would think that a university president would welcome the expression of a diversity of opinions.

On behalf of my institution, I apologize to the students who came to University Council yesterday to protest Justice Thomas's invitation. You deserved better than the patronizing chastisement you received. Further, to the students and faculty who support Justice Thomas, I offer my sincere acknowledgment of our right to "agree to disagree." I hope we can agree that we all sides have the right to state their opinion on this matter.

(For the record, President Adams, alone, chooses the graduation speaker. There is no committee).

Dr. Janet Frick
Dept of Psychology

Originally posted by

Samantha meek

I just wanted to point out how ironic it is that every single pro-Thomas editorial in the Red and Black both yesterday and today were written by MEN. Look, I think the Supreme Court Justice would be an amazing speaker but at any other time this year. Yes, Thomas' allegations were years ago but our university is dealing with this issue right now. I personally saw my mentor and professor resign because of sexual harassment charges and I just think its inappropriate and insensitive to bring someone even remotely attached to sexual harrassment to speak at graduation. Allow those who have suffered from this some chance to heal, will you? Bring him back next year or whatever but give this university and its students time to move on before bringing him here to speak.

Anyone who says that this is a political issue (on a campus by the way that is majority conservative) needs to take a step back and put yourself in the victims shoes. I'm as liberal as they come and I dont care if Thomas comes to speak but not just this year. We've had so many issues with sexual harassment and graduation should be about celebrating the goods things at the University, not focusing on the negative.

And by the way Adams, people protesting against things they don't believe in, whether you like it or not, is not "embarrasing." Its called being American.

Originally posted by

Samantha meek

I just wanted to point out how ironic it is that every single pro-Thomas editorial in the Red and Black both yesterday and today were written by MEN. Look, I think the Supreme Court Justice would be an amazing speaker but at any other time this year. Yes, Thomas' allegations were years ago but our university is dealing with this issue right now. I personally saw my mentor and professor resign because of sexual harassment charges and I just think its inappropriate and insensitive to bring someone even remotely attached to sexual harrassment to speak at graduation. Allow those who have suffered from this some chance to heal, will you? Bring him back next year or whatever but give this university and its students time to move on before bringing him here to speak.

Anyone who says that this is a political issue (on a campus by the way that is majority conservative) needs to take a step back and put yourself in the victims shoes. I'm as liberal as they come and I dont care if Thomas comes to speak but not just this year. We've had so many issues with sexual harassment and graduation should be about celebrating the goods things at the University, not focusing on the negative.

And by the way Adams, people protesting against things they don't believe in, whether you like it or not, is not "embarrasing." Its called being American.

Originally posted by

Allison

In response to Frank Wank, you obviously do not have a grasp on the situation when you have to resort to petty name calling of the people who are brave enough to voice their opinion when people like you make personal attacks on them. Being "American" involves free speech, no matter what that is. This country is full of people with different ideas and backgrounds, that is what defines us. But having Clarence Thomas as a graduation speaker is much different than inviting him for a lecture. You can choose to attend or not to attend a lecture but graduation is a monumental time for any student. It is only fair that the administration picks someone that students seek to emulate, and Clarence Thomas is NOT it. There were numerous women who came forward to accuse Thomas and then some chose not to testify after seeing the character assassination Anita Hill suffered. No matter what his political stance is, someone who has a history of sexual harassment claims is not a wise choice for a university that has been embarrassed by its own sexual harassment cases. Any speaker involved with politics would be controversial to some students and applauded by others. The fact of the matter is that Michael Adams could have made a much wiser choice of graduation speakers. I have worked really hard for four years and I deserve a graduation ceremony where the choice of speaker does not embarrass me. As a side note, Janet Frick is an intelligent, concerned faculty member and I think she should be treated with respect. She has made numerous statement wherein she emphasizes that people have the right to their own opinions. She is not intolerant of other's political views and she is an asset to her department. People who are not afraid to stand up and say something is wrong in spite of ill-founded and ignorant attacks from people like yourself deserve to be commended for their actions.

Originally posted by

Allison

In response to Frank Wank, you obviously do not have a grasp on the situation when you have to resort to petty name calling of the people who are brave enough to voice their opinion when people like you make personal attacks on them. Being "American" involves free speech, no matter what that is. This country is full of people with different ideas and backgrounds, that is what defines us. But having Clarence Thomas as a graduation speaker is much different than inviting him for a lecture. You can choose to attend or not to attend a lecture but graduation is a monumental time for any student. It is only fair that the administration picks someone that students seek to emulate, and Clarence Thomas is NOT it. There were numerous women who came forward to accuse Thomas and then some chose not to testify after seeing the character assassination Anita Hill suffered. No matter what his political stance is, someone who has a history of sexual harassment claims is not a wise choice for a university that has been embarrassed by its own sexual harassment cases. Any speaker involved with politics would be controversial to some students and applauded by others. The fact of the matter is that Michael Adams could have made a much wiser choice of graduation speakers. I have worked really hard for four years and I deserve a graduation ceremony where the choice of speaker does not embarrass me. As a side note, Janet Frick is an intelligent, concerned faculty member and I think she should be treated with respect. She has made numerous statement wherein she emphasizes that people have the right to their own opinions. She is not intolerant of other's political views and she is an asset to her department. People who are not afraid to stand up and say something is wrong in spite of ill-founded and ignorant attacks from people like yourself deserve to be commended for their actions.

Originally posted by

DJ

i think it's very hypocritical for people to completely ignore the whole innocent until proven guilty thing at their convenience!!...and I do agree with Adams about hoping that students don't do anything stupid during the commencement. I personnally will be very embarrassed as an Alumn!

Originally posted by

jim

a) who gives a damn about 20 year old accusations that never panned out?

b) shouldn't the graduating class get to vote on their own commencement speaker? i think that would solve all issues.

Originally posted by

think a little harder

you people invoking the "innocent until proven guilty:" - that is one of the major tenets of the US legal system, NOT a Universal Truth! A person is guilty if they did it - not whether anyone finds out, or whether someone tells on them, or whether they are accused, or tried, or convicted, or punished. Or how long ago it happened.

Originally posted by

UGA democracy anyone?

Attention SGA reps...before you is a fantasctic opportunity that your fellow students will greatly appreciate. Conduct a quick survey asking students whether or not they want Clarence Thomas as their commencement speaker. You can do it through OASIS, publish the results, and present them to Michael Adams. This will say to students that you are truly interested in creating a UGA democracy, at least on matters where there seems to be a great difference of opinion. If you are a current SGA rep, please pass this suggestion on immediately. It would be nice if the Red and Black would at least contact the SGA president to get a response for this suggestion. Thanks!

Originally posted by

UGA democracy anyone?

Attention SGA reps...before you is a fantasctic opportunity that your fellow students will greatly appreciate. Conduct a quick survey asking students whether or not they want Clarence Thomas as their commencement speaker. You can do it through OASIS, publish the results, and present them to Michael Adams. This will say to students that you are truly interested in creating a UGA democracy, at least on matters where there seems to be a great difference of opinion. If you are a current SGA rep, please pass this suggestion on immediately. It would be nice if the Red and Black would at least contact the SGA president to get a response for this suggestion. Thanks!