• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boston University law students offered therapy in response to recent Supreme Court decisions


Good idea, sound mental health is even more important during times of attempted insurrection, Nazi uprising and SCOTUS being usurped.

I stand with mental health and availability of mental healthcare!
 
Don’t you give me this shit. They volunteered
 
Odds are Boston University already offered mental health options for their students, regardless of what the Supreme Court has been doing, this was clearly a political stunt with a determined denounce effort and not surprisingly the opposition took the bait.
 
 
trouble13 said:
Maybe law is the best vocation for someone to pursue if they find they need to seek out therapy when the courts rule against them.
Click to expand...
The students didn't seek out therapy, and the school didn't offer it in response to the SC decisions, the SGA merely reiterated resources already available for students for any mental health issues they may face as students.

As an enlightened, sane, rational, intelligent person I fail to see any issue with any of this.
 
The subtext to this isn't hidden. It's obvious they are telling students that if they are upset with the courts that mental health services are available. The school understands how these latest rulings could damage your mental health.

A lawyer who can not mentally handle a ruling they don't like should not be a lawyer.
 
trouble13 said:
The subtext to this isn't hidden.
Click to expand...
However the truth is there is no evidence that the STUDENTS sought the mental health help, despite any "subtext" that you feel is exposed.
trouble13 said:
It's obvious they are telling students that if they are upset with the courts that mental health services are available.
Click to expand...
Well, it is obvious the SGA is reminding the STUDENTS that mental health help is available for STUDENTS that are stressing over anything, including the recent SCOTUS rulings.
trouble13 said:
The school understands how these latest rulings could damage your mental health.he
Click to expand...
The SGA MEMO did not come from the University aka the School and was not any part of anything the University aka the School did or did not understand as they had no hand in it.
trouble13 said:
A lawyer who can not mentally handle a ruling they don't like should not be a lawyer.
Click to expand...
Those STUDENTS the MEMO was distributed to are not lawyers, they are merely law STUDENTS in unknown capacities of course completion. To target the STUDENTS for ridicule, for an act they did not ask for, nor did they produce, is idiotic at best, as well as insulting.

But hey, let us make a jape of it and ridicule students who are struggling to better themselves and be productive and needful members of society!

Right?

RIGHT!
 
Years ago, at UMBC, I remember counselors visiting dorms and conservative groups who asked for counseling when Clinton was elected to office.

Just saying.
 
If they behave like a snowflake on the the taxpayers dime they can expected to be judged and ridiculed by tax payers
 
ralfy said:
Related:

Click to expand...

The students who did not wish to "hear" the speech could have simply walked out and left those who DID wish to hear the speech participate.

That Mr. Foss(?) Jr. should know better. The "Hecker's veto" is not valid speech, as it is an action/reaction solely taken to shut someone else's freedom to speak down. Those same people are often the first to react in violence (pushing, shoving, tearing at signs/posterboards, spray mace/pepper spray or throw paint/oil etc.), and other methods to shut down speech they don't wish anyone else to hear.

These are also the same people who DEMAND they be allowed to speak and will also react in violence if anyone tries such tactics as they use themselves on them.

My other problem with this is that these may be the same kinds of people who are getting work in Federal and State agencies who create and perpetuate the political activism of concern to many of us as exhibited in the last 3 years. Perhaps also in action against the prior Administration during that 4 year term.
 
Last edited:
All of these law students should be kicked out of law school. Can you imagine how shitty they would be as lawyers dealing with rapes, kidnapping, murder, manslaughter...- what the hell is wrong with these ******s these days.
 
trouble13 said:
If they behave like a snowflake on the the taxpayers dime they can expected to be judged and ridiculed by tax payers
Click to expand...
Could you imagine these ******s on Guadalcanal facing a Banzai Charge? They would come out with flowers and a song and get bayonetted the **** out.
 
yankintx said:
Not all the snow flakes

The biggest snow flake Trump is still crying about a stolen election
Click to expand...
Oh god... ****ing Trump. Cry some more... get it out... and move the **** on.
 
trouble13 said:
If they behave like a snowflake on the the taxpayers dime they can expected to be judged and ridiculed by tax payers
Click to expand...
IF
Of course there is zero evidence that "IF" was any part of this situation, and what took place with these STUDENTS.
Once more, it was the SGA that reached out to the STUDENTS just to remind them that there were services available, with no proof at all that any STUDENTS sought help in regards the SC decisions.
So, even mentioning the alleged, by you or anyone else, validity that, sans any knowledge on your part, how their educations are being funded, these STUDENTS, that "they can expected to be judged and ridiculed by tax payers" is an idiotically absurd premise by any measure.
 
trouble13 said:
If they behave like a snowflake on the the taxpayers dime they can expected to be judged and ridiculed by tax payers
Click to expand...
Looked at the article and followed the links. That majority of these programs are funded by student fees and private grants. BU is also a private college with an endowment of almost 3 billion dollars from trustees.

So, I don't see any taxpayer money paying for these things.

So...they don't get to be ridiculed by tax payers.
 
 
Have the students collectively condemned the SGA for insulting them?
 
When taxpayers were volunteered to pay student loans off it became our business.
 
j brown's body said:
No wonder they have therapy. The actions of the current Supreme Court begs the question, how do you teach or learn law if its based on the whims of the right-wing justices?
Click to expand...

I think they need therapy because they need to prove that it's based on whims and can't.
 
trouble13 said:
Have the students collectively condemned the SGA for insulting them?
Click to expand...
That truly is a silly notion that any STUDENTS would, or should, feel insulted by the SGA MEMO.
 
LouC said:
That truly is a silly notion that any STUDENTS would, or should, feel insulted by the SGA MEMO.
Click to expand...
They are the ones suggesting that students may be mentally too fragile to handle processing a court decision they don't like without the assistance of professional physiatric assistance. That seems rather insulting unless it's true. Which is it? Are they (the students) too fragile for the vocation they have chosen to pursue or does the SGA have an unfairly demeaning opinion of the student body?

Enlighten me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.