Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive

These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE

Questions only?
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-08-2005 15:33
Don't you ever stop asking questoins ?
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-08-2005 16:17
Why would I?
_____________________
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-08-2005 16:50
If I asked would you?
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-08-2005 16:59
When are you going to ask? :D
_____________________
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-08-2005 18:02
How 'bout now?
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-08-2005 19:47
What are you asking again?
_____________________
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-08-2005 22:18
you dont know?
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-08-2005 22:19
Did I forget?
_____________________
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-08-2005 23:03
huh?
Ezequal Torgeson
Geometry God
Join date: 5 Jun 2004
Posts: 93
12-09-2005 02:07
Whats going on here?
_____________________
"It was a 'yes' or 'no' question but all im getting is 'blah blah blah' :mad: "

"Perfect? No ones perfect ... except fo mee :p "

"I make guns for a living ... you were saying something? :D"

Vote Prop 607:
Tree/Heirarchy based Linking
Vote Prop 404:
Low Density Sims
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-11-2005 11:02
You don't know???
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-11-2005 13:55
From: Sydney Jacobs
You don't know???

Will you grant me the privilege and honor of escorting you to the bi-annual gala event this evening, Ms. Jacobs?
_____________________
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-11-2005 13:57
Let me, if I could, go to the Civil Rights Restoration Act. In 1981, you support an effort by the Department of Education to reverse 17 years of civil right protections at colleges and universities that receive federal funds. Under the new regulations, the definition of federal assistance to colleges and universities would be narrow to exclude certain types of student loans and grants so that fewer institutions would be covered by the civil rights laws. As a result, more colleges and universities would legally be able to discriminate against people of color, women and the disabled. Your efforts to narrow the protection of the civil rights laws did not stop there, however. In 1984, in Grove City v. Bell, the Supreme Court decided, contrary to the Department of Education regulation that you supported, that student loans and grants did indeed constitute federal assistance to colleges for purposes of triggering civil rights protections. But, in a surprising twist, the court concluded that the nondiscrimination laws were intended to apply only to the specific program receiving the funds and not to the institution as a whole. Under that reasoning, a university that received federal aid in the form of tuition could not discriminate in admissions but was free to discriminate in athletics, housing, faculty hiring and any other programs that did not receive the direct funds. If the admissions office didn't discriminate, they got the funds through the admission office, they could discriminate in any other place of the university. A strong bipartisan majority in both the House and the Senate decided to pass another law, the Civil Rights Restoration Act, to make it clear that they intended to prohibit discrimination in all programs and activities of a university that received federal assistance. You vehemently opposed the Civil Rights Restoration Act. Even after the Grove City court found otherwise, you still believed that there was, quote -- and this is your quote -- a good deal of intuitive appeal to the argument that federal loans and grants to students should not be viewed as federal financial assistance to the university. You realize, of course, that these loans and grants to the students were paid to the university as tuition. Then, even though you acknowledged that the program-specific aspect of the Supreme Court decision was going to be overturned by the congressional legislation, you continued to believe that it would be, quote, too onerous for colleges to comply with nondiscrimination laws across the entire university unless it was, quote, on the basis of something more solid than federal aid to students. Judge Roberts, if your position prevailed, it would have been legal in many cases to discriminate in athletics for girls, women. It would have been legal to discriminate in the hiring of teachers. It would have been legal not to provide services or accommodations to the disabled. Do you still believe today that it is too onerous for the government to require universities that accept tuition payments from students who rely on federal grants and loans not to discriminate in any of their programs or activities?
_____________________
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-11-2005 14:46
From: Cid Jacobs
Will you grant me the privilege and honor of escorting you to the bi-annual gala event this evening, Ms. Jacobs?



Bi-annual gala?
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-11-2005 14:46
From: Cid Jacobs
Let me, if I could, go to the Civil Rights Restoration Act. In 1981, you support an effort by the Department of Education to reverse 17 years of civil right protections at colleges and universities that receive federal funds. Under the new regulations, the definition of federal assistance to colleges and universities would be narrow to exclude certain types of student loans and grants so that fewer institutions would be covered by the civil rights laws. As a result, more colleges and universities would legally be able to discriminate against people of color, women and the disabled. Your efforts to narrow the protection of the civil rights laws did not stop there, however. In 1984, in Grove City v. Bell, the Supreme Court decided, contrary to the Department of Education regulation that you supported, that student loans and grants did indeed constitute federal assistance to colleges for purposes of triggering civil rights protections. But, in a surprising twist, the court concluded that the nondiscrimination laws were intended to apply only to the specific program receiving the funds and not to the institution as a whole. Under that reasoning, a university that received federal aid in the form of tuition could not discriminate in admissions but was free to discriminate in athletics, housing, faculty hiring and any other programs that did not receive the direct funds. If the admissions office didn't discriminate, they got the funds through the admission office, they could discriminate in any other place of the university. A strong bipartisan majority in both the House and the Senate decided to pass another law, the Civil Rights Restoration Act, to make it clear that they intended to prohibit discrimination in all programs and activities of a university that received federal assistance. You vehemently opposed the Civil Rights Restoration Act. Even after the Grove City court found otherwise, you still believed that there was, quote -- and this is your quote -- a good deal of intuitive appeal to the argument that federal loans and grants to students should not be viewed as federal financial assistance to the university. You realize, of course, that these loans and grants to the students were paid to the university as tuition. Then, even though you acknowledged that the program-specific aspect of the Supreme Court decision was going to be overturned by the congressional legislation, you continued to believe that it would be, quote, too onerous for colleges to comply with nondiscrimination laws across the entire university unless it was, quote, on the basis of something more solid than federal aid to students. Judge Roberts, if your position prevailed, it would have been legal in many cases to discriminate in athletics for girls, women. It would have been legal to discriminate in the hiring of teachers. It would have been legal not to provide services or accommodations to the disabled. Do you still believe today that it is too onerous for the government to require universities that accept tuition payments from students who rely on federal grants and loans not to discriminate in any of their programs or activities?



Why so loooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggggggg?
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-11-2005 15:34
From: Sydney Jacobs
Bi-annual gala?

Isn't it the party you requested I attend with you?
_____________________
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-11-2005 15:34
From: Sydney Jacobs
Why so loooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggggggg?

How many people have asked me that before? ;)
_____________________
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-11-2005 16:19
From: Cid Jacobs
Isn't it the party you requested I attend with you?



What party? Are you asking me out????? why??? lol
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-11-2005 16:20
From: Cid Jacobs
How many people have asked me that before? ;)




Do you think you're funny??
Billy Grace
Land Market Facilitator
Join date: 8 Mar 2004
Posts: 2,307
12-11-2005 16:36
Do you really have to ask that question?
_____________________
I find it rather easy to portray a businessman. Being bland, rather cruel and incompetent comes naturally to me.
John Cleese, 1939 -
Sydney Jacobs
Registered User
Join date: 31 May 2004
Posts: 756
12-11-2005 23:29
Do you really have to ask THAT question?
Mimi Therian
Registered User
Join date: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 492
12-12-2005 13:37
why, do you have a thing agianst tranvestines?
_____________________
my stores at:

*:.Garbage Town.:* , Sibine (25, 50, 52)
Cid Jacobs
Theoretical Meteorologist
Join date: 18 Jul 2004
Posts: 4,304
12-12-2005 15:23
From: Mimi Therian
why, do you have a thing agianst tranvestines?

Since when do I have a thing against transvestites? :confused:
_____________________
Billy Grace
Land Market Facilitator
Join date: 8 Mar 2004
Posts: 2,307
01-04-2006 06:31
How can it be that the greatest thread in SL off topic history has died? :(
_____________________
I find it rather easy to portray a businessman. Being bland, rather cruel and incompetent comes naturally to me.
John Cleese, 1939 -
Billy Grace
Land Market Facilitator
Join date: 8 Mar 2004
Posts: 2,307
01-05-2006 11:18
Where are Madame and Liona when I need them most?
_____________________
I find it rather easy to portray a businessman. Being bland, rather cruel and incompetent comes naturally to me.
John Cleese, 1939 -