• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

This Has To Be A Joke: Unfortunately It Is Not.

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
An understandable thing to ask for? That’s insane. There are protections for political beliefs, and someone should not lose their law license for vocalizing their political opinions.

Our local MP (a government minister) lied about his opponent in the run up to a general election. And won the seat.
He was taken to an election court and lost the case. All costs against him.
He lost the seat and was barred from standing again.
You can not lie about opponents in UK elections
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
An understandable thing to ask for? That’s insane. There are protections for political beliefs, and someone should not lose their law license for vocalizing their political opinions.
This is undermining the law and constitution of the USA, not a political opinion.

It is well established fact who won the election, not a matter of opinion. Something like 60, I repeat 60, legal challenges from Trump's team have been thrown out by the law of the USA.

So we have two lawyers, who are also senators, now repeating these obvious lies that the election was fraudulent and thus not only lying but knowingly undermining the US legal system and US democracy. This is disgraceful.
 
The headline of the second link is a bit misleading. According to the article, it’s four students, who sent a letter arguing they should revoke the degrees of three public figures: Ted Cruz, Kayleigh McEnany and Dan Crenshaw.

This is hardly newsworthy. Fox News made it seem like a large number of Harvard students wanted to revoke a large number of graduates’ degrees. They buried that clarity at the end and gave little airtime to the reasons the students gave for proposing this.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Ya know....sometimes retribution looks good when
one is in the position to stick it to one's foes.
But what goes around comes around.
Your foes will learn the trick, & you're next.
Yep. Apply the law to your opponents and it will be applied to you next. Most politicians (on both sides) aren't too fond of equality before the law. That's why I fear Biden may pardon Trump and why the impeachment might not succeed (but I'm still hopeful for that one).
 
Last edited:

Heyo

Veteran Member
I'm generally fine with a university revoking a degree if things come to light that would have been likely to stop the degree from being issued in the first place.

The most common cases are about plagiarism, but I also support revoking a degree from someone who committed sexual assault while a student, but didn't get found out until after graduation.
Not so sure about the last one, but, yes, illegitimately gained degrees should be (and usually are) revoked.
And I'd also argue that who disavows science, promotes anti science or dismisses the scientific process should be barred from using their title. E.g. everyone working for AiG or DI.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Not so sure about the last one, but, yes, illegitimately gained degrees should be (and usually are) revoked.
On the last one: if someone hid the fact that they committed a crime while a student that would have gotten them expelled, then I'd say that the degree was illegitimately gained.

And I'd also argue that who disavows science, promotes anti science or dismisses the scientific process should be barred from using their title. E.g. everyone working for AiG or DI.
I'm not sure how that would work; it's not like you need to get permission from a university to say that you graduated from there.

One option that might hopefully make both sides happy, though: when they issue a copy of your transcript - e.g. for a new job or to apply for grad school - it could include your disciplinary record, including any censures issued after graduation.

That way, it would be clear that the student did the course work for their degree, but it would also be clear that whether the person has done something to bring the institution into disrepute.

Employers who care about those sorts of things could ask for a fresh transcript sent directly to them by the university.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
On the last one: if someone hid the fact that they committed a crime while a student that would have gotten them expelled, then I'd say that the degree was illegitimately gained.
You would have been expelled for a prank. Maybe even gone to jail. And reapplied, done the works and legitimately got the title.
Send the perp to prison for the rape. Inside his title wouldn't be worth much, but when his time is done, he's in the same situation as someone who had some holiday semesters during the study.
I'm not sure how that would work; it's not like you need to get permission from a university to say that you graduated from there.
In Germany it is illegal to carry a title one hasn't legitimately gained.
Printing a business card with a "Dr." before your name can earn you a fine of several thousand Euros. It's similar in other European countries.
One option that might hopefully make both sides happy, though: when they issue a copy of your transcript - e.g. for a new job or to apply for grad school - it could include your disciplinary record, including any censures issued after graduation.

That way, it would be clear that the student did the course work for their degree, but it would also be clear that whether the person has done something to bring the institution into disrepute.

Employers who care about those sorts of things could ask for a fresh transcript sent directly to them by the university.
It's not only employers. The public has a right to know if someone has earned the credentials he's spouting.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Yep. Apply the law to your opponents and it will be applied to you next. Most politicians (on both sides) aren't to fond of equality before the law. That's why I fear Biden may pardon Trump and why the impeachment might not succeed (but I'm still hopeful for that one).
Agree.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Our local MP (a government minister) lied about his opponent in the run up to a general election. And won the seat.
He was taken to an election court and lost the case. All costs against him.
He lost the seat and was barred from standing again.
You can not lie about opponents in UK elections
That’s good.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
This is undermining the law and constitution of the USA, not a political opinion.

It is well established fact who won the election, not a matter of opinion. Something like 60, I repeat 60, legal challenges from Trump's team have been thrown out by the law of the USA.

So we have two lawyers, who are also senators, now repeating these obvious lies that the election was fraudulent and thus not only lying but knowingly undermining the US legal system and US democracy. This is disgraceful.
Not sure it’s exactly as you say.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Not sure it’s exactly as you say.
Well of course it is. You do not get 60 legal claims thrown out, largely by Trump-appointed judges, unless the claims are worthless. By that point any lawyer, which these two senators both are, will know for damned sure there is no substance to the claims of fraud.
 

Watchmen

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Well of course it is. You do not get 60 legal claims thrown out, largely by Trump-appointed judges, unless the claims are worthless. By that point any lawyer, which these two senators both are, will know for damned sure there is no substance to the claims of fraud.
Can you quote one of Cruz’s “unethical” statements?
 
Top