Someone enlighten me

—“It’s a wonderful thing for any immigrant community to become connected to or engaged in our higher education system,” she said.—

I don’t understand how advocating against gay marriage connects student leaders to higher education. Shouldn’t student leaders be representing and supporting ALL students, regardless of sexual preference, ethnicity, religion, or gender? Why should a Council member even address sexual preference?

kgotthardt, at 9:10 am EDT on October 3, 2008

Ironic, isn’t it?

Isn’t it ironic that people leave their home country to escape persecution only to persecute others in their adopted land?

Hana, Assoc. Prof., at 10:25 am EDT on October 3, 2008

Chalk one up for democracy

The outcopme of the democratic process isn’t always pretty but this example is very encouraging nevertheless on both fronts. The administration has not over reacted and in fact the Dean of Students is appropriately, in my opinion, working to make the events a good learning experience for all students. Kudos to the dean and the college in handling this (so far) by turning it into an important teachable moment. Protecting the rights of all students is the aim here and it isn’t easy in highly diverse environments.

Kevin Drumm, College President, at 12:20 pm EDT on October 3, 2008

Seperation of church and state

Not only do these “elected officials” not represent the student body as a whole, it is apparent that they see their office as a means to advance their religious beliefs.

Why not just adopt a rule that requires a minimum number to vote in order to certify victory? If one person voted for all of the candidates would that have been enough? What exactly is “representative” about it? A little common sense is needed here.

dundermifflin, at 2:10 pm EDT on October 3, 2008

Send them back to Russia. They clearly don’t deserve to be in America spreading hatred against gays. We already have enough of those people as it is. Geesh!

gianstefano, at 2:50 pm EDT on October 3, 2008

ARC Student Council Vote on Prop 8

Several of Slavic members of the ARC Student Council have been actively protesting gay events in Sacramento for several years.

When many of the Slavic members of the Student Council originally ran for the council they stated in their applications they wanted to represent “Christians on campus” and “righteousness”

These members have a blatant anti-gay agenda!! There are many pictures of some of the Slavic Evangelical council members picketing lawful, peaceful gay events.

The animosity between the Slavic Evangelicals and the Sacramento gay community was started by the Slavic Evangelicals who started picketing gay events and whose behavior was appalling as they spit on people, pushed them and physically blocked peaceful gays as they went about their lawful activities.

The Sacramento chief of police had to call the Slavic leaders in to tell them such behavior was illegal and if they persisted in it they would be arrested.

And one can not overlook the death of Satender Singh, a gay man, at the hands of 6 Slavic Evangelicals in July, 2007.

Many of these Slavic Evangelical students or their parents came to America to escape religious persecution in their native countries but they now using their religious belief in a very un-American way by persecuting other Americans

Jerry Sloan, ARC Student Council Vote on Prop 8, at 3:05 pm EDT on October 3, 2008

Attack the person?

Come on Larry, attacking the person and not the issue? That’s a basic fallacy and I’d expect more on IHE.

I don’t care if you agree with what these Slavic individuals stand for or not. They have a voice just like anyone else. The problem is the two groups are diametrically opposed, and to represent both fairly would take somewhat equal involvement from both parties. The Slavic students were very democratic and systematic in their approach. They got elected and pushed their agenda – there isn’t a more American way to operate. A “portion” of the student body is unhappy with the outcome, but the process worked. One group was more organized than the other. Unless you can demonstrate through factual evidence that the elected officials are going against the “majority” of the students’ wishes, I don’t see the problem. I’m not on either side of the issue. I’m arguing for the fact that the process worked and those that didn’t take part shouldn’t complain about the outcome and cry foul after the fact. I don’t have a problem with recalling when the official goes against the will of the majority, but I haven’t seen evidence of that here. They voted based on their circle of influence. How is that different than any other elected official in the US?

Befuddled, at 4:20 pm EDT on October 3, 2008

Who cares what their nationality is?

Why do you people even care what nationality the student council members were? What if they were all Mexican? What a useless article, its only purpose appears to be anti-Slavic, attempting fuel the flames of bigotry against the Slavic community rather than focus on the issue at hand: prop 8.

Aaron, Student at ARC, at 6:40 am EDT on October 4, 2008

Befuddled: “The Slavic students were very democratic and systematic in their approach. They got elected and pushed their agenda – there isn’t a more American way to operate.”

Well, there are aspects of their methods that bear scrutiny. Three of the students distributed campaign material with a photo identifying one of our transsexual students. Thus far, none of them have offered any credible explanation, and I am concerned for her safety. This cryptic act was vaguely menacing, and at the very least distasteful and personal.

Here’s a link to the ARC Current and to the local newsweekly.

amcgaffic, at 2:01 pm EDT on October 7, 2008

My apologies. I meant to cite my background information, without realizing that linking is not allowed.

The incident to which I’m referring is described on the American River Current’s website, dated 5/14/08, and the Sacramento News & Review, dated 10/01/08.

amcgaffic, at 6:35 pm EDT on October 7, 2008