Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

News

UCSB Professor Faces Assault Charges After Dispute With Pro-Life Protesters



[UPDATE 3/16: This article has been revised to include information from a UCSB Police Department crime report detailing Miller-Young’s account of the incident.]

[UPDATE 3/14: This article has been revised to include quotes from Kritina Garza of Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust and information on the petition in support of Miller-Young created by student Facebook group UCSB Microaggressions.]

Feminist studies Professor Mireille Miller-Young is facing vandalism, battery, and robbery charges after an incident in the Arbor last Tuesday, March 4, in which she took and destroyed a poster depicting graphic images of aborted fetuses displayed by members of Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, a Riverside-based pro-life group.

While walking from class to her office in South Hall with some of her students at around 11 a.m., Miller-Young saw the graphic posters and confronted the protesters, arguing with them and drawing in a crowd of surrounding onlookers. After a heated argument, Miller-Young took the poster and began taking it to her office, followed by two pro-life protesters, 21-year-old Joan Short and her 16-year-old sister Thrin. After entering the elevator in South Hall, Miller-Young attempted to stop the girls from following and, as shown in a video taken by one of the protesters, appears to have pushed them away. According to a UCSB Police Department crime report, once in her office, Miller-Young used scissors to destroy the poster, which she found offensive as a pregnant woman who teaches about women’s “reproductive rights.”

In the crime report, which describes a conversation held between Miller-Young and a UCPD officer whose name has been redacted, Miller-Young took responsibility for taking and destroying the poster and refused to give the names of students who were “following” her. Although she said she did not know “what an acceptable and legal response to hate speech would be,” Miller-Young said her actions were justified.

“Miller-Young went on to say that because the poster was upsetting to her and her students, she felt that the activists did not have a right to be there,” the crime report states.

Further, Miller-Young said she had a “moral” right in taking the poster, as showing graphic imagery was “insensitive” and a violation of University policy.

“Miller-Young argued that she set a good example for her students … [and] likened her behavior to that of a ‘conscientious objector,'” the crime report states. “Miller-Young said that she did not feel that what she had done was criminal. However, she acknowledged that the sign did not belong to her.”

According to the crime report, Miller-Young said her response to the protestors may have been influenced by the fact that she is preparing to undergo a test that will determine if her child has Down Syndrome. In addition, she offered to pay for the sign and expressed interest in an out-of-court settlement, but maintained the protestors had violated her rights.

“[They violated] my personal right to go to work and not be in harm. … I work here. Why do they get to intervene in that?” she said in the crime report.

The protestors from Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust could not be reached for comment, Sergeant Rob Romero of UCPD has not responded to several phone calls about the incident since last week and Miller-Young declined to comment further due to pending charges.

UCSB Director of News and Media George Foulsham said the university cannot speak about the matter but the incident is currently being reviewed.

“The University is aware of the incident and it is being reviewed by the appropriate offices. It is University policy not to discuss personnel matters,” Foulsham said in an email.

But on campus, a debate has arisen of whether or not Miller-Young’s actions are legally considered a restriction of free speech. William Creeley, Director of Legal and Public Advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (F.I.R.E.), said the pro-life group’s posters and actions would be considered protected speech under the law.

“Those graphic images are protected speech, protected by the First Amendment, however distasteful, shocking or offensive they may be to some or most viewers,” Creeley said. “Taking down the signs, if the signs have been permissibly placed on campus, is an act of vandalism and also an act of censorship, so we would oppose those kinds of vigilante responses to protected expression, regardless of content of expression. … I encourage folks who feel angered, disgusted, repelled, to respond with speech of their own, make their own posters, have their own protest.”

According to UCSB Students for Life President Andres Riofrio, his campus group is not affiliated with Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, and the protestors are from Thomas Aquinas College, although their school did not sponsor or support the protest. UCSB Students for Life upholds a policy that “any graphic picture of abortion victims be shown to someone after getting their explicit permission.” However, the group issued a statement in support of the young protesters on their public Facebook page.

“Feminist studies Prof. Mireille Miller-Young violated the rights of a 16-year-old girl speaking out for the rights of the most vulnerable among us,” the statement reads. “Isn’t feminism about respecting the rights of everyone equally?”

While Riofrio said the two groups practice different tactics, the two organizations share a common goal and he said pro-life groups generally face such resistance when protesting.

“As pro-life activists, we expect to be verbally and physically abused because we know people have very personal feelings about abortion,” Riofrio said in an email. “Last year, we did a non-graphic display called the Cemetery of the Innocents and a woman repeatedly try to steal our signs. This year we have been yelled at a few times as well. But we have to speak up. Otherwise, who will be a voice for the voiceless?”

A student in Professor Miller-Young’s Women of Color class, who requested to remain anonymous, defended the professor for her reaction to the posters and said Miller-Young has faced harassment since the incident. She said the pro-life protesters “sensationalized” what occurred.

“She’s pregnant, so she’s very sensitive to horrifying images like that,” the student said. “That group posted on Christian websites about the professor, and she’s been getting a lot of hate mail. People are calling her a baby killer, saying she looks like she’s from a safari because she’s black and from Africa, that she’s going against Rule of God … She’s tried to show hate mail to police, but no one’s helping her so she’s just talking with her defense attorney.”

A student Facebook group called UCSB Microaggressions has set up a petition on change.org addressed to Chancellor Yang and other members of the UCSB community that requests a  statement of solidarity with Miller-Young and greater restrictions on content that may be traumatic to students or trigger unwanted reminders of past experiences. At the time of publication, the petition had 1,009 signatures with a goal of 1,700.

“Your dedication to campus safety must include addressing the presence of triggering people and images on our campus as well as supporting Professor Miller-Young who is a fundamental part of not only Feminist Studies department, but also to the University,” the petition states.

Kristina Garza, outreach director for Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust, said she was surprised to see a professor react so strongly, and aside from a few exceptions such responses to the group are “rare.”

“We’re shocked and we’re appalled that a professor, someone who’s supposed to be role model for students, not only did something illegal, but that she would encourage others to break the law,” Garza said. “No matter what your difference in opinion is, no one justifies breaking the law. Perhaps she is angry or felt the law did not apply to her because she was professor. It is obvious from the video that she was inciting other students to violence.”

 

Video Courtesy of SurvivorsLA

This story appeared as an online exclusive on Thursday, March 13, 2014.

Print Friendly

355 Responses to UCSB Professor Faces Assault Charges After Dispute With Pro-Life Protesters

  1. home care Reply

    September 19, 2014 at 9:31 am

    Pretty! This has been a really wonderful post.
    Thanks for supplying these details.

  2. Terri Reply

    September 15, 2014 at 4:58 pm

    I caught a couple of misconceptions flowing from the mouth of this professor while viewing the video. First of all, how could this she state that the pictures of aborted fetuses were too disturbing to her and her students when she is promoting abortion? Is she saying that what she is promoting is too disturbing to actually look at? Obviously, she must not truly believe in abortion if she finds the reality of the act too disturbing to face.
    The second thing that was interesting to hear her say was that the protesters who were on campus were not allowed to be there because they do not pay to be there. Wait a minute! Isn’t this university state funded? Since when did state run universities, paid by tax payers as well as tuition, become private clubs? Ms. Miller-Young, you do not have the right to steal, abuse, declare that universities are off limits to American citizens if they do not pay tuition, or sit on your high and mighty cloud of absurd self righteousness and proclaim that your “knowledge” gives you the right to be an expert on what women in general view as right. You…are wrong, and the reason that you can not look at the disturbing reality that is presented in the photographs that these pro-life protesters brought to your school, is because in the back of your brain, you have stored a cell or two that amazingly gives you a sense of decency that prevents you from viewing what truly happens to these babies that are killed each year. Maybe your grandmother left it there for you. It’s called a conscience. Please try to use it more often.

  3. Mark Ogilvie Reply

    July 11, 2014 at 6:21 am

    Sounds like she was having a bad day and just lost it. The Prof was wrong in doing anything but yelling or ignoring them. Myself I’d take an apology.

  4. clear Reply

    May 23, 2014 at 8:51 am

    Professors go through special training to learn to be bullies. I know I was there for many years and experienced it first hand. It has nothing to do with anyone’s view, they are BULLIES—

  5. Otis Scott Reply

    March 31, 2014 at 12:33 pm

    Fire this professor right now.
    http://www.change.org/petitions/chancellor-henry-t-yang-ucsb-professor-mireille-miller-young-should-be-fired?utm_source=guides&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=petition_created
    As Noam Chomsky said, “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.” Please know that this is not to show support for Pro-Life. This is to show support for our freedom of speech, our laws, and justice.

    • Bob Reply

      May 21, 2014 at 5:04 pm

      You are a horrible person. How do you live with yourself?

      • Otis Scott Reply

        May 22, 2014 at 2:36 pm

        How do I live with myself??? I do quite well actually. I believe in standing up against injustices no matter who they happen to. Do you defend assaults? Do you not believe in freedom of speech? Do you only think laws should apply where and when you think necessary? I have stood up for many in my lifetime, including the homeless, disadvantaged youth, human rights abuses here and abroad, children of abuse, people with mental illnesses, and much, much more. What have you done? I am guessing not much.

  6. Mary Reply

    March 29, 2014 at 3:07 pm

    Wow! What a completely biased view regarding rights. The protesters had a right to be there just as much as she did.

  7. Amy Knitter Reply

    March 28, 2014 at 1:30 pm

    What a shame that school of supposed “higher” education has become a school of intolerance, hatred, and racism. I have just removed UCSB off the list as one of my daughter’s choices for school next year.

    • Will Reply

      March 28, 2014 at 6:40 pm

      You are not alone. That Youtube video of this incident has over 141,000 views. Parents see a 16 year old girl assaulted by a professor and they also see a University that appears to be backing the professor, including Vice Chancellor Young. You can’t watch that video and think, yeah that’s a place I want my 18 year old to go. Especially if they are pro-life. You would hate to have to tell her to keep her views to herself because you don’t know what the response of the students would be. Or what the University’s response would be. The University would probably blame the victim in that case as well. We all need to unite to stop violence against women.

  8. ControlYourself Reply

    March 27, 2014 at 7:56 pm

    Joni Ernst! A real American Feminist. Mom, Soldier, and takes no crap. She’s strong enough to resist not freaking out and hitting little children (except her own of course). I also don’t think she’ll play the victim card unlike some other feminists out there…

    • Anti-feminist Reply

      March 30, 2014 at 3:32 pm

      There’s no such thing as a real AMERICAN feminist. Feminism is fascism writ large both ideologically and in application. Sadly, many American women seem to believe that freaking out and hitting THEIR OWN little children is better than hitting someone else’s. That may be why women are the majority of child abusers in the US too.

  9. Gary Fouse Reply

    March 27, 2014 at 4:39 pm

    Just read the campus e-mail from Vice Chancellor Young. It is appalling and shameful. Talk about blame the victim.

  10. aj Reply

    March 25, 2014 at 12:08 pm

    Amazing. And appalling. What a monumental embarrassment to the university and the nation. The ignorance of the students supporting Miller-Young is pitiful, but not unusual given their age.

    “Professor” Miller-Young’s ignorance is not excusable and likely incurable as her understanding of “free speech” and First Amendment rights do not extend beyond the bounds of her self-inflated girth.

    • aj Reply

      March 25, 2014 at 12:09 pm

      Apologies for the double post.

  11. aj Reply

    March 25, 2014 at 11:02 am

    Amazing. This “professor” is a monumental embarrassment to the school and the nation.

    “Hate speech” is anything this woman and her ilk don’t like. “Free speech” and First Amendment rights are anything they agree with. And she is paid to teach!

    I hope the school and the student body are awakened to the serious threat we face from such people and their agenda.

  12. Rob Reply

    March 25, 2014 at 8:59 am

    You have to wonder how a University can have a faculty members who has such a profound lack of understanding of freedom of speech (which is a cornerstone of higher education), and then uses that lack of understanding to justify assaulting a minor.

    Also, the tactic of blaming the victim the professor is engaging in is common to abusers.

  13. Big Bill Reply

    March 25, 2014 at 3:45 am

    So who were the other two thieves? The Chinese chick and the Mexican chick stealing and carrying off the sign?

    The Professor lied to the police. She told them that SHE took the sign and not any students, but clearly the theft was a joint effort.

    Is the University going to discipline them?

    Or do chick-minions get a free pass at UCSB?

  14. Susie Jensen, PsyD Reply

    March 24, 2014 at 6:15 pm

    The worst part of this is the letter sent out by the university closing ranks around this professor:

    Here is the full letter from Vice Chancellor Michael Young, e-mailed to students on March 19 and 21:

    March 21, 2014

    To: Campus Community

    Fr: Michael D. Young Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs

    Re: Students and Free Speech at UCSB

    Below you will find an email communication that I sent out earlier this week to all UCSB students expressing my views on free speech. Sincerely, Michael D. Young Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs

    March 19, 2014

    Dear Students:

    Over the past several weeks, our campus has been visited by a number of outside groups and individuals coming here to promote an ideology, to promulgate particular beliefs (at times extreme beliefs), or simply to create discord that furthers a certain personal agenda. Some passionately believe in their causes, while others peddle hate and intolerance with less-than-noble aims.

    Whatever the motives and goals, the presence of such people and groups on campus can be disruptive and has the potential to draw us into the kind of conflict that puts at risk the quality of exchange of ideas that is fundamental to the mission of our university.

    What is happening now is not new: evangelical types have been visiting UCSB and university campuses since time immemorial. What we see at UCSB today is simply the most recent generation of true believers, self-proclaimed prophets, and provocateurs.

    During the past few weeks, UCSB has been visited by various anti-abortion crusaders. Some have been considerate and thoughtful in promoting their message; others have openly displayed images that many in our community find distressing and offensive.

    We have also seen earnest and thoughtful religious missionaries, and we have seen proselytizers hawking intolerance in the name of religious belief. As a consequence of interactions with the more extreme of our visitors, students have expressed outrage, pain, embarrassment, fear, hurt, and feelings of harassment. Moreover, I have received requests that the campus prohibit the peddling of “fear,” “hate,” “intolerance,” and “discord” here at UCSB.

    Those of you who know me are aware that I have strong views on the matter of intolerance. You also know that I hold equally strong views on the sanctity of free speech. If you have heard me speak at Convocation or at anti-hate events, or if you have seen me officiating at the Queer Wedding, you know that my message on both counts is clear. Recent events lead me to believe that this message bears repeating.

    First, the principle of freedom of expression resides at the very foundation of our society and, most certainly, at the foundation of a world-class university such as UC Santa Barbara. Freedom and rights are not situational: we either have freedom of speech or we do not. We cannot pick and choose which views are allowed to be aired and who is allowed to speak. If that were the case, then only those in charge — those holding power — would determine who gets to speak and whose views are heard.

    Second, freedom is not free. The price of freedom for all to speak is that, at times, everyone will be subjected to speech and expression that we, ourselves, find offensive, hateful, vile, hurtful, provocative, and perhaps even evil. So be it! Law and policy ban only an extremely narrow band of speech and expression-”yelling ‘fire!’ in a crowded theatre,” for example, and child pornography. The price we pay to speak our own minds is allowing others to speak theirs, regardless of how oppositional their views are to our own. Our Founding Fathers-all white men of privilege, some even slave owners-got it right when designing the First Amendment of the Constitution.

    Having firmly stated my support for freedom of expression, I hasten to follow with a lesson my mother taught me when I was a small child, a lesson that has remained with me the rest of my life and that I relay to our entering students every fall at Convocation. My mother taught me that just because you can say or do something doesn’t mean that you should. Civility plays an important role in how we choose to exercise our right to expression. We all have the right to say odious things, to display offensive slogans and placards, and to hurt and disrespect groups and individuals that disagree with us. The question is: should we? Should we engage in these behaviors just because we can or because they serve our political, religious, or personal agendas?

    At UCSB, our students have proven that we are better than this. While it has not always been easy, time and again UCSB students have demonstrated that they can disagree about the critical issues of our time — fundamentally and passionately but within a framework of humanity and civility, respecting the dignity of those whose views they oppose. Time and time again, UCSB students have demonstrated that they understand their role in defining the character and quality of this campus community — revealing their unwillingness to lower themselves to the tactics of those whose agenda comes wrapped in intolerance and extremism.

    And now we are tested once again, outsiders coming into our midst to provoke us, to taunt us and attempt to turn us against one another as they promote personal causes and agendas. If we take the bait, if we adopt negative tactics and engage in name calling, confrontation, provocation, and offensive behavior, then they win and our community loses. While urging you to engage with differing ideas and opinions in a civil manner, I also want to remind you that you have the option not to engage at all. You do not have to listen to, look at, or even acknowledge speech or expression that you find provocative or offensive. The Arbor Mall is a free speech area, as is the area in front of the University Center. If you do not want to be confronted by certain materials or expressions, you should avoid the free-speech areas when you expect that you might encounter them, or simply ignore them. I promise you the visitors will hate that.

    And, finally, if you think demonstrators, activists, or proselytizers are violating the law, report them to the UC Police Department. If you think they are violating campus policies, report them to the Office of Student Life (OSL). Similarly, if you feel harassed or think you are being subjected to offensive speech or material as an involuntary audience, please contact the Office of Student Life immediately. Katya Armistead, Associate Dean of Student Life and Activities, can be reached at 805-893-8912. If you do not reach her, someone at the general OSL number (805-893-4550) will be able to relay your message to her. The campus regulations address UCSB’s free speech policies further

    • PoliticallyIncorrect Reply

      March 24, 2014 at 7:23 pm

      You gotta love it. Race, class, and gender (sex) indoctrination still rules at this lovely Utopia by the sea.

      1)Race: ‘white’ as he ignores the black academic criminal here.

      2)Class: ‘privileged’ as he ignores the privileged feminist porn professor

      3)’Gender'(sex) ‘male’ as he ignores the alleged female criminal here.

      All in all another good day for the Gaucho PC goons thanks to this kind of ‘community’ support from a top administrative goon.

    • Will Reply

      March 25, 2014 at 8:49 am

      It is pretty clear from this memo that a university employee just attacked these girls a 2nd time. This blame the victim attitude needs to stop. Violence is wrong. This attack was an embarrassment to the university. This follow-up memo just goes to solidify how deep the intolerance at this university runs. It is generating bad press nationally for this university. Staff is out of control. It is incidents like this where university presidents are removed. It may be time for that. Women being attacked on and off campus is unacceptable. If university leadership does not care, they need removed.

    • Tom Reply

      March 26, 2014 at 10:47 pm

      It looks like Mr. Young can’t handle a little give and take, which is what universities historically have been all about. The contest of ideas. Sifting the truth from the falsehood. I’d say he belongs in another line of work. Photos of aborted babies are just the real world today, unfortunately.
      As far as this prof, she’s pregnant, with the possibility of some bad news on the way. Down’s Syndrome. And she sounds like she’s ready to patch things up with the Short sisters. I recommend the three of them sit down together, and talk about this baby, who’s life may be on the line. Down’s Syndrome or not, that baby deserves a chance.

      • Will Reply

        March 27, 2014 at 8:39 pm

        Tom, her baby does not have Down’s Syndrome. All women have periodic exams while pregnant. She is making up excuses because she is in danger of losing her job and being found guilty of criminal charges. I have no doubt that now she would like to appear regretful to make this go away. I can’t imagine that there is a huge porn professor market. Tom, you cannot watch this lady walk away from the girls with a big smile on her face and tell me it had anything to do with distress about the pregnancy. Look what the Prof. retweeted on Twitter. Read it and tell me that you sympathize with her.

        Modern Leftist ‏@ModernLeftist Mar 12
        #UCSB campus is NOT a space for hate. I will march alongside @DrMireille until the whining little bigot eats her accusation w/ a barbed fork

    • stan klein Reply

      April 1, 2014 at 7:36 am

      What is wrong with you people? The letter (clearly restated above) does NOT condone the acts of the professor. Quite the contrary — The letter supports freedom of speech — even for those with whom one disagrees strongly.

      All that many of you seem to focus on is the letter’s comments/sentiments about the grotesque nature of the “messages” on the signs in the Arbor. That is the letter writer’s freedom of speech as well. But he does not agree with the tactics. Fine. But he explicitly and unambiguously and repeatedly states the Professor’s response was wrong and in clear violation of free speech; and that this is not appropriate behavior for UCSB.

      This is not a Rorschach test. It is not a game in which you read and comment on the select aspects of a long and thoughtful letter that represent views contrary to your own. Of course, you have the freedom of speech to do so. But it does not go any way toward rational discourse. I would hope for better from UCSB students.

  15. Susie Jensen, PsyD Reply

    March 24, 2014 at 6:02 pm

    If this is how a faculty member acts in public, can you imagine how she treats those with differing opinions in her classroom? Universities should be about learning and exploring other points of view, no matter how uncomfortable. Today most are invested in being politically correct and furthering a false “diversity” meme that causes more division and hatred than it alleviates.

  16. jwmellott Reply

    March 24, 2014 at 2:27 pm

    Without question, the scariest part of this story is that that feminazi is having a baby.

  17. Marge Reply

    March 24, 2014 at 1:37 pm

    Women like Professor(it sounds like she shouldn’t have this title) Miller Young really bring women down. I can’t think of a more worthless major than women’s studies. “When you aren’t bright enough to study math or science you get a degree in Women’s Studies”, this is quoted by my daughter who is studying chemical engineering. Why would any self respecting university have faculty who work on pornography and issues with “sex workers”? Stop dumbing down your students. They deserve better than Prof Miller Young.

  18. Marge Reply

    March 24, 2014 at 1:27 pm

    What a pathetic professor. Are people really granted Phds in such worthless fields of “study”? I hope the family sues her for assault. The University should fire her; is this how she reacts to people and situations she doesn’t agree with? My kids would never pursue nor would my husband and I EVER pay for such worthless majors as the professor proudly posts. My girls got degrees that required them to have brains and that benefit society like a math degree with a concentration in finance, business with accounting, nursing and chemical engineering.

  19. Ken Reply

    March 23, 2014 at 3:07 pm

    This case is now not about abortion rights…it’s about a crime of an adult (1) verbally and physically assaulting a minor, (2) committing theft and (3) destruction of property. My prediction? She will go down for the count on all three charges and soon be fired by UCSB. She has wisely already lawyered up. It used to be in the bad old days an adult could get away with this sort of behavior, but no longer. Very few high school teachers – not to say college professors – can survive a conviction of a direct assault on a minor.

    • jwmellott Reply

      March 24, 2014 at 2:25 pm

      I doubt it. One Feminazi on the jury will nullify the quest for justice. Personally, I’d suggest calling CPS– they might have some tools that the police don’t have. The only problem there is, lots of social work are also feminazis.

    • The Dog Pound Reply

      March 24, 2014 at 4:55 pm

      She felt they were intervening in her ability to do her job by protesting in the Free Speech area? Likewise, the original content was about the right to an abortion; however, her acts had nothing to do with that. What’s at the core of this, that she took personal property of another, encouraged students to do the same, then when confronted for the return of the personal property and not in any danger felt it was ok to physically assault, no matter the degree, another person. Find me a house where the older childer wouldn’t have been spanked for doing the same thing to their younger sibling.

      I will agree, there is no need for racially hostile emails degrading her based on the color of her skin or her education. If you think the education is a joke, then go leave those comments for the Univserity of New York where she was granted those degrees. Skin color doesn’t make you a jerk, being a jerk makes you a jerk. Also, no need for death threats. All three show a level of maturity on par with her own expressed maturity.

      Lastly, this hasn’t been blown out of proportion. The public is reacting to what has been written and what was visualy recorded about this incident. All she needed to do was take 3 steps in the direction of her office and she would have forgotten they were in the FREE SPEECH area by the time she was at the elevator.

  20. Fire her now Reply

    March 23, 2014 at 9:33 am

    This woman should be fired.

    She is an insult to her school and educators whom she pretends to

  21. Mr. Reality Reply

    March 21, 2014 at 9:01 pm

    Professor Femi-Nazi Smut Peddler was charged with theft, battery and vandalism!

    Great news.

  22. Roger Shrubber Reply

    March 21, 2014 at 7:28 pm

    “professor”? have standards come down this far? Intolerant of an opposing view? Violence instead of a valid argument? She is waging a “war on women” who don’t agree with her. UCSB should be embarrassed….if she keeps her job, it’s because the university is so weak it cannot tolerate all views.

  23. Chiam Goldstein Reply

    March 19, 2014 at 10:38 pm

    All you need to know is that around blacks, never relax

    • clazy8 Reply

      March 21, 2014 at 5:45 am

      Is this supposed to be a real comment? The guy can’t even spell his own supposed name. But he/she would like you to believe that the issue is race, rather like the anonymous student from one of Miller-Young’s classes, who claims the professor has been getting hate mail inflected with racism. Pathetic.

  24. Adam Wood Reply

    March 18, 2014 at 6:31 pm

    So this woman, this thug, has not been arrested yet? Why not?

    Someone needs to start investigating the UCSB PD and turning over rocks to find out why an arrest has not yet been made. There’s PLENTY of evidence available for an arrest warrant to be issued. She should already be in jail awaiting a bond hearing.

    • Hashtag Reply

      March 19, 2014 at 11:23 am

      I think they need to go to the District Attorney’s office for the warrant. Seems like the District Attorney’s office is now reviewing what happened.

  25. SD Reply

    March 18, 2014 at 4:40 pm

    #ZeroTolerance.

    For on-campus violence; for out-of-control behaviors that resulted in physical harm done to another woman. In a free-speech zone!

    How can anyone justify this professor’s lack of self-control? She is a paragon of self-righteousness; claiming to have been ‘triggered’ by a still image. This, from a professor with a ‘Doctor of Philosophy’ parchment, who specializes in, among other things, pornography and porn imagery.

    Anyone who believes her line of reasoning, isn’t reasoning.

    • Annie Reply

      March 19, 2014 at 9:37 pm

      Some animals are more equal than others.

      • Guest Reply

        March 21, 2014 at 8:30 am

        What is “animals” supposed to mean?

        • UNGuest Reply

          March 21, 2014 at 5:08 pm

          It’s a literary reference but you go on assuming…

        • PhD_Alumni Reply

          March 23, 2014 at 12:26 am

          Try adding George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” to your reading list. It’s an allegorical novel set as a fairy tale which critiques communism and authoritarianism. The quote is directly taken from the novel. It’s the sort of thing that a well read college student *should* be familiar with.

          • Guest Reply

            March 23, 2014 at 9:05 am

            I see your PhD is in “How to insult and demean others.”

            • SoOffended Reply

              March 23, 2014 at 10:02 am

              You insult and demean yourself with your perpetual victimhood.

              • Guest Reply

                March 23, 2014 at 10:49 am

                You insult and demean others with your perpetual aggression.

            • SoOffended Reply

              March 23, 2014 at 10:24 pm

              You confuse aggression with assertion. This is a common mistake in PC havens…which seem to be civil on the surface but which are really seething cauldrons of aggression beneath the surface.

              • Guest Reply

                March 24, 2014 at 9:49 am

                Dear PhD: Ha! LOL! My ASSERTION (you seem to keep missing it, since it is not YOUR assertion) is that you are an intellectual aggressive and bully. My colleagues in emergency dispatch would be surprised to hear we are “left wingers.”I don’t need a high degree to recognize an intellectual bully, formed in the academy,when I read one. Signed: an AA degree and proud.

            • Susie Jensen, PsyD Reply

              March 24, 2014 at 6:04 pm

              Seriously, you need to read the book. It is not about demeaning anyone. Stop before you look even sillier.

              • Guest Reply

                March 24, 2014 at 8:54 pm

                Dear Susie Jensen PsyD:
                Are you referring to the book “Animal Farm”? Why do you assume only you PhD’s have read it? Most of us read that book in High School. It is YOU who should stop before you looking “sillier.” Please stop your intellectual superiority. Sincerely,
                Hazel Fowle

    • james Doesky Reply

      March 21, 2014 at 9:45 am

      LOL….”Free speech zone” ???
      Normally the entire United States is a free speech zone.
      The college campus is the least free place in the United States.

      http://www.prageruniversity.com/Political-Science/The-Least-Free-Place-in-America.html#.Uyxq8VcVB8E

  26. JBlack Reply

    March 18, 2014 at 12:12 pm

    I found this website with a portion of the police report that discusses the Professor’s version of events the day of the demonstration.

    https://static.squarespace.com/static/51097d01e4b034113fcdd785/t/53239eade4b01b9feb609f05/1394843309089/UCSB-Police-Report.pdf

    Opinion: From the Professor’s own statements It doesn’t sound to me that the professor was compelled to comit any crimes or batter the 16 year old. The report is obviously missing several pages so it’s difficult to see the other point of views…

    If anyone finds the whole report online please post…

  27. JBlack Reply

    March 17, 2014 at 10:12 pm

    I don’t agree with either petitions. They are based on emotion and not the law or justice. Both of them appear racist, naive and lacking objectivity.

    Please people get your facts and your opinions straight!

    FACT: The anti-abortionists violated no laws or UCSB policy. People who say the demonstrators needed to notify campus are wrong. To prove this read: http://www.police.ucsb.edu/resources/freedom-expression. The anti-abortionists did not imprison people. Everyone was free to leave at any time.

    FACT: Demonstrators may have had disturbing images but they are protected speech AND were designed to provoke conversation (though provoking a reaction is also likely a goal). They liken abortion to murder so clearly they are very passionate. People are free to disagree with their viewpoint but people are not free to be physically violent.

    BELIEF: The professor never contacted the police or any university official before taking a vigilante approach to handling the situation.

    FACT: The professor violated the law when she stole the sign. The demonstrators did not force the professor to do this. The demonstrators followed the professor to get their sign back (not to stalk or antagonize). By law the anti-abortionists have the right to corner (detain) the professor for her crimes in preparation for an arrest (the sisters were calling the police). While the posters were gruesome and disturbing – the professors actions were not lawful or in support of free speech.

    FACT: The professor battered the juvenile multiple times. The juvenile never struck the professor. The pr

    OPINION: Ultimately she set a bad example for pro-choice supporters and her own students. She gave the impression to her students that violence was okay. She also involved these students with a crime.

    OPINION: It is a shame that the professor is receiving hate mail and harassment. I don’t like what the professor did but that doesn’t give me or anyone the right to harass her. I suggest anyone sending her hate mail, stating hate speech, or harassing her, is acting equally as awful as the professor. Just because the professor antagonized, robbed, and battered a juvenile, doesn’t give anyone the right to harass or make her feel in fear. The legal system and the UCSB administration should be the only ones judging her and considering what is justice here… not vigilantes. (SPECULATION) Though, I seriously doubt the professor is cooperating with the police or the university hence, she has not given the university an opportunity to address this issue. Until she admits her mistakes and takes accountability I assume she is on her own because she can’t reach out to the people who are in a position to help her.

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 17, 2014 at 11:39 pm

      Bottom Line: the Left is becoming increasingly shrill, unhinged and violent toward those they consider their opposition. It is becoming a public health issue for normal Americans. The real ‘war against women’ is that against Catholic women, including the two involved here. Cowardly black youth sans parental control are attacking people nationwide because they are white and Eric Holder, former Angela Davis-with-big-hair-lookalike sits smugly in the background smirking; his wife all the while owning an abortion clinic in Alabama. Incarceration for those opposed to ‘global warming’ has been suggested this week by a ‘professor’. Homosexuals in San Francisco suggest that any judge having anything to do with the Boy Scouts should be disqualified as a judge. The mayors of Boston and New York refused to march in their respective St. Patrick’s Day parades because the Catholic Church opposes homosexuality. One was Clinton’s campaign manager. This leftist behavior is eerie and un-American. When is the chancellor of UCSB going to get off his/her fat a– and fully address the issue as an adult rather than as a PC automaton concerned about their state pension.

      • Guest Reply

        March 21, 2014 at 8:29 am

        Reply to J:
        You say “the left is becoming increasingly shrill.”? Take a look at the shrill messages the right is leaving on this webpage. More than “shrill,” downright scary!

        • Susie Jensen, PsyD Reply

          March 24, 2014 at 6:08 pm

          You mean they disagree with you?

        • PoliticallyIncorrect Reply

          March 24, 2014 at 7:25 pm

          We ain’t just tighty righties.

    • Guest Reply

      March 18, 2014 at 10:01 am

      Thank you. This is the first comment I’ve read on this site that is kind, objective, non-discriminatory and helpful to me in thinking through this issue.

      • Will Reply

        March 18, 2014 at 10:13 pm

        It is all about being civil. You and I should have the ability to set up a table and advocate anything without getting shouted at, having stuff stolen and being attacked. You would think a university would be a place for that. If you think I am breaking a rule, call the university security office. If you don’t like what I say, respectfully walk away. If you are curious, talk to me. Let’s be polite and respectful. Keep an open mind. I have some vastly different views than some I had in college. College can be an echo chamber with immature people who are driven by emotion. If your impulse is to yell or assault a 16 year old girl, the problem is you.

        • Guest Reply

          March 19, 2014 at 8:39 am

          That was an uncivil reply.

    • Guest Reply

      March 21, 2014 at 8:31 am

      This is the only civil message on this page! Wow!

  28. Deserttrek Reply

    March 17, 2014 at 5:51 pm

    the so called professor has obvious mental health issues and should be forced to seek help and should not be in the position she is in. she should also face criminal and civil penalties. like a sex offender listing there should be lists for other professions to keep those like her out of teaching and having the ability to influence and poison the minds of others.

  29. Robert Reply

    March 17, 2014 at 11:59 am

    If the University fails to protect its guests against any aggressive anger of instructional staff, the Academy might be placed in the untenable position of being accused of enforcing a negative hegemony upon its students, as well as their neighbors, friends and families. I would prefer to see the university free of any such opinion by the world beyond the Academy. After all, ultimately it is the community of neighbors, friends, and family whose taxes pay the bill.

  30. Robert Reply

    March 17, 2014 at 11:36 am

    The trouble is . . . if this professor is allowed to get off scot free in this situation, then outsiders will conclude that no one is safe on this campus but rather that the campus is a place where people who disagree with your world view are allowed to drag you into the Inquisition and put you to death simply because you have a different point of view from those who teach or attend school here. Hopefully the university would not want that kind of image to circulate across our nation where freedom of speech has been an accepted principle of life for centuries.

  31. Robert Reply

    March 17, 2014 at 11:28 am

    What is needed most of all is objectivity and the application of logic, not angry emotion and bizarre insinuations. If the Academy wants to rid itself of the accusation that all it does is indoctrinate and brainwash its student body, then the Academy will deal with this situation as any court of law would deal with assault and theft. Otherwise, outsiders will be forced to come to the conclusion that students do not get an education in the Academy but rather get duped. I hope that is not the result of this incident.

  32. Mr. Reality Reply

    March 16, 2014 at 10:34 am

    It’s refreshing to see that with the exception of some indoctrinated students who idolize this Femi-Nazi, most people are on the sane side of this issue.

    Furthermore, it’s an encouraging sign that the country is not only waking up to the ugly realities of progressive liberalism, they’re rejecting it.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 16, 2014 at 11:29 am

      According to my sources, mockers of the idols of progressive liberalism must hold their anti-worship underground, lest they risk discovery by the inquisition and find themselves on the rack, or tied to the stake.

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 17, 2014 at 2:40 am

      The complete dismantling of the Left/gay idol story about Matthew Sheppard is a wonder to behold (‘The Book of Matt: Hidden Truths About the Murder of Matthew Shepard’). It is but an earlier Trayvon Martin-style fairytale – false creations of the Left media. Shephard was actually involved in a meth deal gone bad: the locals in Laramie knew it, but Clinton was about to be impeached that week so the MSM needed a distraction for the public. Yes, the iscountry waking up to all of this. However, instead of Janet Reno running things, we now have Janet Napolitano.

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 17, 2014 at 10:42 am

      800 mostly rich comments on Breitbart concerning this matter.

  33. stan klein Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 4:49 pm

    Wow. Talk about spinning out of control into the information void!

    Calling for petitions to fire the professor?

    How about letting the legal system do its job?

    Who knows all the facts in this case. I don’t. From what I have seen, I do not like what the professor did one bit.

    But we don’t need the modern equivalent of a public hanging until the parties involved have their say in a court hopefully informed by all available evidence.

    Anything more at this point amounts to hysterics and posturing.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 6:40 pm

      I believe the reason for the petition is that the supporters of the the smiling, triggered feminist, black porn expert have been gathering signatures in support of their icon.

      So, it would be fair to let it be known that not everyone supports their agenda.

      • Dave Reply

        March 15, 2014 at 7:08 pm

        That is exactly the reason for it. Again, I personally don’t if you are pro-choice or pro-life. This is not what it is about. I personally am pro-choice, but I think she should be fired.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 8:19 pm

          You know if anyone grabbed a sign from one of the holy, set on high politically protected groups, he/she would not only be fired, they would be calling for blood.

    • Guest Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 11:22 pm

      Actually, based on the tape in this case, based on forty years of bigoted totalitarianism in feminist ‘scholarship’, and based on our supposed shared respect for reason-based scholarship, for evidence-based science, and for free speech, it’s time to begin cleaning house so that the very posturing hysterics who hold our institutions of Higher Ed. hostage are banned altogether or are forced to follow the standards for scholarship which apply to everyone else. Feminists and other PC faux-liberal academics belong in covens far away from academics in the same way their fascist religious counterparts belong in churches rather than schools. To force the public to pay for PC propaganda rackets which destroy our common welfare, which systematically poison students’ minds, and which are utterly ‘criminal’ academically, is worse than foolish. It’s outrageous, tyrannical, and suicidal.

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 11:23 pm

      This professor committed an assault and battery as well as theft on a minor by an adult in a public place without provocation. There were witnesses and the entire matter is on tape. Presumably the two women filed a police report, not only with the University Police but with the County Sheriff. Had this professor been in any normal place of work, she would have been immediately arrested, bail would possibly have been established and she would possibly have been placed on leave until the matter was disposed of. Given the adversarial atmosphere not only of this but of a number of campus issues ( see list in this paper ), It seems to me the failure of campus authorities to address these matters, this tolerance of goonish behavior on campus by certain elements perhaps the US Attorney’s office should be apprised of the fact that certain members of the faculty, staff and student body should become the subject of a gang injunction, similar to those in place in the City of Oxnard. It seems assured that Janet Napolitano will do nothing. As of a Feb. 26 8-1 ruling by the US Supreme Court, pro-abortionists cannot attempt the use of RICO statutes to extort revenge against anti-abortion protesters. See Ya.

      • Guest Reply

        March 15, 2014 at 11:53 pm

        Since the top totalitarian goons sit in the White House, and are traitorous male gender bigots to boot, we are probably going to have to do this from the bottom up. Going after Obama’s OCR’s retarded rape letter to colleges is probably as good a place to start as any. Next we need to cut the budgets, for GWS and for every other dishonest ‘discipline’ in which women and men like our favorite professor ‘breed’.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 16, 2014 at 1:24 am

          Do you possess verifiable evidence they are male? Or human? :) Perhaps abandoning the draft was one of the worst things this country did.

    • Mr. Reality Reply

      March 16, 2014 at 10:36 am

      Stan writes, “But we don’t need the modern equivalent of a public hanging until the parties involved have their say in a court hopefully informed by all available evidence.”

      Yep, tell that to George Zimmerman.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 16, 2014 at 11:20 am

        Yes, we know if the protesters had been members of one of the multicultural popedom’s treasured saints, there would have been a public hanging, and the group the perpetrator belonged to would be pissing all over themselves to create distance from their recalcitrant colleague.

        I heard a funny story about a guy who needed to fill his schedule and signed up for a course in “women’s history,” because he assumed it would be about – well – women’s history. He didn’t know that he had unwittingly stumbled into a den of self-diagnosed victimized male bashers, making him a convenient target with the encouragement of the instructor, and so chose to drop the “history,” course. I think it was a “future,” course rather than a history one. If Ms. MM-Y is really pregnant, as she just appeared fat to me in the video, I wonder who the sperm donor is?

  34. AlanP Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 2:43 pm

    Those who want to discuss case law and legal restrictions that can limit freedom of speech from being absolute, are missing the point. It matters not one whit if the girls had offensive pictures. It matters not one whit if they were in violation of campus rules. If they were violating anything, campus police had the authority to stop them, not two students and a professor.
    If the professor wanted the girls to stop, she should have reported them to campus cops. Had the campus police decided to arrest them, they would have held the poster as evidence and a judge would have decided whether to return the poster or destroy it.
    Instead, the professor and two students stole private property and took it upon themselves to destroy it. The did not hold the poster for the decision of a court. In commission of the theft, the professor committed assault and battery. They also infringed on the civil rights of two young ladies. And, as the professor is a member of staff/faculty, she opened the university to a civil action and monetary damages. UCSB really needs to limit its liability by firing the professor as quickly as possible and sending a strong, clear message that freedom of speech is protected, no matter if some people are offended.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 2:51 pm

      I suspect that the “good,” professor is being (as we speak) encouraged to voluntarily resigned and provided with a nice buy-out to help her along. That way, the university avoids blowback from the PC crowd for firing her, and also protects themselves from further legal responsibility.

      This is one reason pro-life groups always travel with videocamera in hand, as it wouldn’t be surprising for staff and campus police to change the story to protect the university.

      I can guarantee that UCSB’s legal department is on top of this. If all Professor Victim did was shout profanity, even racist profanity, it could be shrugged off with an apology. UCSB’s insurers are already in deep doo doo, and they can’t afford to allow the ditch to get deeper.

      • PhD_Alumni Reply

        March 22, 2014 at 11:25 pm

        “This is one reason pro-life groups always travel with videocamera in hand, as it wouldn’t be surprising for staff and campus police to change the story to protect the university.”

        Already happened. Read the police report and then view the YouTube video of the event. Miller-Young claims to the police that she was the one that carried the poster off. The video clearly shows it was two students under her direction. She claims not to know who the students are. But it is clear from the interaction shown that they know each other. Frankly, there should be additional charges of conspiracy to deprive another of their civil rights, lying to a police investigator, and hindering a police investigation.

        But clearly, those charges will go away, because the school knows that if *students* were hit with theft and vandalism charges, the ability to sweep this whole matter under the rug would disappear, as no student’s parent in their right mind would let the university lawyers represent them. (Ms. Miller-Young has little choice, as the university is her employer) And lawyers representing the student vandals would doubtless point to the “authority figure” and institution as the most culpable.

  35. Ben Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 2:21 pm

    Fire this professor right now.

    http://www.change.org/petitions/chancellor-henry-t-yang-ucsb-professor-mireille-miller-young-should-be-fired?utm_source=guides&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=petition_created

    As Noam Chomsky said, “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.” Please know that this is not to show support for Pro-Life. This is to show support for our freedom of speech, our laws, and justice.

  36. stan klein Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 11:16 am

    Whether others are afraid to behave in particular ways possibly as a consequence of the climate perceived to be engendered by one side or the other certainly IS tangential to the issue under discussion — that is, legal and constitutional culpability of specific acts performed by individuals associated with UCSB.

  37. stan klein Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 10:27 am

    There are a seriously emotional and controversial set of related issues.

    But please make an effort to remain on-point.

    The thread, as I understand it refers to the activities of a UCSB professor and her students and how those acts reflect on both our campus and on freedom of expression. The pro-lifer’s behavior may also be in some violation (I do not know as yet).

    What I DO know is that the actions of a representative of the University behaved in a manner that seems to be inappropriate and possibly in violation of the law (based on current textual and visual evidence — though more may emerge to temper that view).

    Whether the pro-life representatives provoked the situation, were in violation of regulations or whatever, is in now way, shape or form justification for the on-tape behavior that was made available.

    As of now, that is the focus of discussion. Attempts to vilify are diversionary at best. There is a clear right and wrong that merits attention and discussion. All else is tangential at present to the legality, constitutionality and reputation of UCSB.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 10:43 am

      I don’t believe it is tangential. I know students at UCSB and other UC schools who are afraid not only to voice their contrary to PC viewpoints, but are even afraid to write articles in their school papers under a pen name lest their identity be discovered and they face academic and social retaliation from the bigots that rule over them.

      • juandeveras Reply

        March 15, 2014 at 4:18 pm

        Why don’t you show some character and go to the chancellor or whomever runs that place and state your piece. Now that Anita Hill’s lawyer, Janet Napolitano, is supposed to be running the UC system, I’d raise hell with her – not simply as a student but as a taxpayer. Who does she think she is condoning such behavior. She’s lawyer. What court ever enforced political correctness as a legal construct ?

        • Chaya Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 4:37 pm

          I’m not a student; just paying tuition, and will be paying tuition for 2 in the UC system in the fall.

          Most of the academic world lies under the ever present thumb of the multicultural police state, and unless customers are going to boycott en masse (which won’t happen) they will continue to have free reign. I have been told that because UCSB draws many of its students from a higher socio-economic demographic, it is actually far more “chill,” than other UC schools in the strictness of forced compliance.

          However, I was informed that the student council members had to request secret ballots when they voted down the BDS-holes because they had been threatened by the liberal/Muslim nexus, and feared retaliation. I was told some girls requested chaperones to return to their homes.

          Yes, I am ticked to be paying for my kids to receive an education, only to find them pressured and manipulated into silence and even pretended acquiesence.

          • juandeveras Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 11:36 pm

            In every county there sits a grand jury. Its purpose is to address issues which governmental authorities have failed to address. This campus is not, to my knowledge and despite the trite PC rules which infest it, above the law, nor should it be allowed to create and enforce its own goofy PC rules, many of which are in violation of the US Constitution. I would think a campus operating in violation of US constitutional law could be said to be in the business of racketeering, just like the mafia – just like Putin in Crimea.

            • Chaya Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 11:55 pm

              The justice system is also overrun by pc goons, established and supported via corruption at the top. The Constitution has been so shredded it is barely recognizable in rulings. Government runs the mafia racket, and according to the Borg, “You will be assimilated.”

              • juandeveras Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 7:50 am

                Give it a rest.

  38. L Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 8:21 am

    I’m an alum, and I’ve seen this group before. They are seriously evil people. They harass students and post images that violate all campus policies for posting. I was harassed by them when I was pregnant and cannot express quite how repugnant their methods are. At the time I told them that they should be ashamed of themselves and that I hoped someday that they could reform and make themselves right with God so that they were serving good instead of the evil that they devote themselves to.

    Now I find out that they don’t get campus permission and I could have called police to get them ejected from campus?
    There is no way in which their actions are legal or legitimate without going through the appropriate channels for approval. I only wish that the professor had called campus police instead to get these horrible people ejected and cited instead of reacting to their deliberately inflammatory act. I can only imagine that this reaction is exactly what they have been trying to get for years. I hope that this at least can result in permanent bans from campus for this group.

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 8:47 am

      Dear obviously lib Pelosi wannabe alumette – How absolutely dreadful these ‘seriously evil people ‘ (aka Christian students opposed to abortions) who ‘harass students and post images that violate all campus policies for posting’ ( ie they were speaking in a zone known to most as a free speech zone designated as such in the middle of the UCSB campus and posted NOTHING !!! Do you understand that !!! – Their signs and illustrations were being hand-carried and they were carrying on conversations with people on both sides of the issues when this two-legged bi-racial slug showed up and had her student flunky minions grab them – The slug then scratched both arms of this minor female when she attempted to retrieve her property at the elevator door. The slug will now be welcomed with open arMs by the Sisterhood at Chino Women’s Correctional Facility – paid for by the same taxpayers who paid for UCSB.

      • L Reply

        March 15, 2014 at 9:05 am

        You, sir, are a moron, as evinced by your addiction to exclamation points and capital letters. I defy you to show me any part of the New Testament that supports any action of this non-student group as Christian.

        • bella Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 9:26 am

          Though shall not murder. That’s just right off the top of my head but the Bible is full of other relatable scriptures.

          • L Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 1:39 pm

            Old Testament. How about you actually look through the words of Jesus and see if you can come up with anything?

            • Chaya Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 2:02 pm

              Here are a few, although Jesus validated everything written in the Tanakh, which you call the, “Old Testament.” A bit of background: Purposeful abortion would be anathema to the ancient Jewish community, so there would be no need to teach against it. Children were seen as a blessing and an honor. According to torah, if two men were fighting and injured a pregnant woman, causing her to miscarry, the perpetrator(s) were severely punished. Ex. 21:22-25.

              Probably the closest thing we see would be the pagan idolators who enticed the Hebrews to join them in their infant sacrifices to Moloch. Ancient Greeks and Romans exposed unwanted children or tossed them over cliffs. Thus the warning not to follow the practices of the nations.

              Matthew 7:12, the Lord Jesus Christ said, “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Abortion violates the golden rule. What person would desire that they be killed because they are economically or emotionally inconvenient, or part of a vulnerable population? I believe that the aborted generation, who experienced their own siblings and playmates being removed from them via abortion, will in good turn, abort their own aged, infirm, emotionally and financially burdensome parents.

              Luke 1:15 tells that John the Baptist will be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb.

              A couple other verses from the “Old Testament,” which you so denigrate:

              Proverbs 6:16-17 God hates those who shed innocent blood. Deuteronomy 27:25 Cursed be he that takes reward to slay an innocent person. And all the people shall say, Amen.

              • L Reply

                March 15, 2014 at 8:20 pm

                That’s really a stretch of theological interpretation. Also, you might take a look at some of the earliest directives for Jewish midwives that explain that if the midwife has to choose between saving the life of the mother or the infant, they are to choose the mother. You really might try studying up on things more carefully before you generalize or distort the text.

                • Chaya Reply

                  March 15, 2014 at 10:18 pm

                  L., could you provide me with a source for your statement? In any case, to give the life of the mother precedence over the life of the infant in a life-threatening situation (not called tissue or product of conception) could not be construed as approval of voluntary abortion. This is a short summary of midrash and aggadah on midwifery, and notice that Shifrah and Puah were commended for their refusal to be complicit in Pharoah’s scheme. http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/midwife-midrash-and-aggadah Do you know Hebrew?

                • L Reply

                  March 16, 2014 at 5:45 am

                  Your analogy to the passover story would really only forbid state-sponsored abortion, not voluntary abortion, as the mothers in question were not the ones directing the decision.
                  Here’s a good discussion of Talmudic scholars’ discussion of the history of Jadaism’s position on abortion from the Biblical period to the present: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/abortion.html

                  • Chay a

                    March 16, 2014 at 2:51 pm

                    Although the Talmudic writings contain, “everything and its opposite,” I don’t see any arguments that would allow or encourage abortion except in the case where the mother’s life is in danger.

                    This seems to be the central focus:

                    The easiest way to conceptualize a fetus in halacha is to imagine it as a full-fledged human being – but not quite. In most circumstances, the fetus is treated like any other “person.” Generally, one may not deliberately harm a fetus, and sanctions are placed upon those that purposefully cause a woman to miscarry. However, when its life comes into direct conflict with an already born person, the autonomous person’s life takes precedence.

                    Regarding the Passover story, you are still arguing from ignorance, as nowhere is abortion (and this might be categorized as partial birth abortion)repudiated only due to the fact that the process is government forced, such as with China’s one child policy, which you might agree with. Pop theology can spin things any way you like. You could argue the Hebrew midwives only acted to prevent the pollution of the Nile River with dead babies, thus protecting the environment.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 10:16 am

          Some verses:

          “Do not stand idly by when your neighbor’s life is threatened. I am the LORD. Lev. 19:16

          Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, Is. 10:1

          Rescue those who are being taken away to death; hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter. Prov. 24:11

          • ashley Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 1:13 pm

            Psalm 139:14-16 are also on point. In part stating “for you created my in most being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made…”

          • L Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 1:33 pm

            Do either of you understand the difference between the New Testament and the Old Testament? You’re not making a case for your scriptural knowledge here.

            • juandeveras Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 4:07 pm

              We all know the OT is the Hebrew Bible. What’s your point ?

              • Chaya Reply

                March 15, 2014 at 4:23 pm

                Perhaps all don’t. Perhaps many don’t know that this was the only bible that Jesus and his 12 disciples had access to. The term, “OT,” comes from Marcion, and was an attempt to disparage and even eliminate these writings.

                Logic would call the argument that one must find specific verses prohibiting abortion in scripture, “an argument from ignorance.” The NT also doesn’t prohibit cannibalism, although torah does.

              • L Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 5:46 am

                That these are by no means explicitly Christian beliefs. If you have ever eaten pork or shellfish, then you obviously differentiate between the two books as well.

                • Chaya Reply

                  March 16, 2014 at 2:37 pm

                  I don’t eat pork or shellfish, and discussion of various theologies is beyond the scope of this discussion.

                  However, I challenge you to show me how the New Testament writings in Greek deviate from what you call the Old Testament writings in Hebrew and occasionally Aramaic in regard to viewpoints on life in the womb.

            • ashley Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 10:34 pm

              Yes I do. The fact that you think in this instance that it makes any difference suggests that it is you that has no real understanding of the Bible.

              • L Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 5:35 am

                No, it suggests that these are by no means explicitly Christian beliefs. If you have ever eaten pork or shellfish, then you obviously differentiate between the two books as well.

        • juandeveras Reply

          March 16, 2014 at 7:45 am

          Don’t you mean “evidenced” rather than “evinced”? I had no idea that on could become ‘addicted’ to exclamation points and capital letters – and I was an English major.

      • E Reply

        March 15, 2014 at 2:55 pm

        Just want to point out that these people were not “Christian students”. Its a Riverside based organization. Those showing the graphic materials are not a part of this campus and are not students.

        • juandeveras Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 4:04 pm

          How the f— do you know whether ‘these people’ are ‘Christian students’ and WTF difference does it make, b—- ? The campus at UCSB is owned and paid for by the taxpayers of this state. These are the same taxpayers who are forced against their will to underwrite abortions perform3edv by Planned Parenthood against 70% of DrMireille’s own ‘people’. The older one, not a minor, attends, ewe are informed, Thomas Aquinas College, a Catholic college near Santa Paula and regarded by most as one of the top five liberal arts colleges in the US.

    • Ashley Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 9:44 am

      No, they most likely didn’t harass you. If you visibly pregnant, they most likely were thrilled. If you were not visibly pregnant the only way they would have known you were would be if you marched up to them and said you were pregnant and would do with the baby what you wanted in which case yes they probably did give you a brochure and tried to talk to you. Neither scenario is harassment. In any event, they had a perfect right to be where they were. The university is a public university and they were in a free speech zone and according to reports, the school has acknowledged that the group was allowed to be where they were. You may not agree with their group or like the images but at some point, the pro abortion movement is just going to have to be intellectually honest enough to acknowledge the reality of abortion as portrayed in those pictures. As violent and graphic as they probably were, they are truth, the same as war photos, pictures of battered women, anything else so graphic. As for the professor, I don’t know if she will go to jail given California’s prison situation, but she should. She stole these girls property and then assaulted at least one of them all while smiling and taunting them. Again, the video and pictures of the cuts and bruises show what happened. At the very least, she and the university will likely be sued and rightly so and these girls will win. She should also be fired. Her behavior is likely enough to justify a firing even if she has tenure given the theft and assault of a minor. If the university keeps her on, the open themselves up to huge liabilities the next time she does this.

      • L Reply

        March 15, 2014 at 1:38 pm

        I was visibly pregnant and I was harassed. You don’t seem to know the group very well if you believe they would not do so. Shame on you for defending their actions without any actual awareness of their behavior.

        You obviously have not read any of the relevant policies that govern the presentation of material in the free speech zone. Outside entities need University approval to use a space designated for the campus community. I can only hope that this scene makes the broader University community aware of their rights to call and have this group ejected whenever they show up unannounced as they did this time.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 2:10 pm

          Harassed? How? Physically assaulted? Verbally attacked with profanity, obscenity? Theft of property? Or was it your oh so tender feelings were injured? Gosh, we must all live our lives to not damage such weak, helpless creatures that run academia and quash dissent.

          Yes, if you feel threatened or that someone is behaving inappropriately, by all means call security, and allow them to handle it lawfully (I hope.)

          • L Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 8:22 pm

            Harassed by the legal definition of harassed, which you might bother looking up.

            • Chaya Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 10:36 pm

              http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=853

              Legal definition of harassment. It appears your good buddy the feminist (hopefully ex) professor fit this definition. You would need to show me where a person is given a waiver for illegal behavior for any reason, and if her mental health was so endangered by offensive speech, she belongs in a hospital, not in a classroom. If you believe you were legally harassed, go find an attorney who will take your case.

        • juandeveras Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 4:10 pm

          Kindly define ‘The Group’ with some specificity.

          • Will Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 10:36 pm

            Hey L, everyone here can see through your lies. These anti abortion people on campus do not harass anyone. Your hate is making you lie. I feel sorry for you.

            • L Reply

              March 16, 2014 at 5:32 am

              You might try actually going and watching the behavior of this particular group before you rush to their defense. Just because you don’t want to believe something doesn’t actually make it invalid. There is nothing Christian about the behavior of this group.

              • Mr. Reality Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 10:40 am

                Other than the fact that they don’t want people to murder their babies, there is nothing Christian about this group.

                Got it.

              • Chaya Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 3:05 pm

                L, you might try watching the behavior of your smiling goddess before you rush to the defense of her and her ilk.

                Also,you would have to define for me what you mean by, “Christian behavior.” If they were doing anything illegal, the girls would be the ones facing criminal charges.

        • ashley Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 10:45 pm

          Actually as an attorney,I’m very well aware of the legalities of free speech zones and even the college has acknowledged that this group was allowed to be there. There is not a chance this group could have legally been removed for doing what they did that day. In fact, they’ve been back again since.

          Sorry, I don’t believe a pro life group harassed a visibly pregnant woman on sight. If you went up to them and told them you were pro abortion then I’m sure they tried to talk to you about it but that does not harassment make. Your comments here have not really inspired confidence in your story that pro lifers thought it would be in keeping with their mission to just go up and start harassing visibly pregnant women. If they in fact did, you should have reported them

          • L Reply

            March 16, 2014 at 5:29 am

            Well, I’m sorry that you beliefs have blinded you to the fact that not everyone who believes as you do acts in accordance with your own philosophy. Maybe someday you’ll understand that there are groups of every political and philosophical position who use extremist behaviors and do not act in accordance with reason or courtesy.

            • L Reply

              March 16, 2014 at 11:08 am

              *your

            • Chaya Reply

              March 16, 2014 at 2:58 pm

              L, you don’t view assault and stealing property “extremist,” unreasonable, or not courteous?

              Yes, I know. “Extremist,” is the catch phrase liberal bigots use to marginalize and demonize their critics.

              Do your fellow ideologues act with reason and courtesy? Looks like we have just seen exhibit A that you don’t.

              • L Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 5:27 pm

                You really haven’t actually bothered reading what I wrote in the initial comment, have you?

                • Chaya Reply

                  March 16, 2014 at 6:33 pm

                  Yes, read it.

  39. Gary Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 5:24 am

    Seriously, offensive and graphic. It may come as a surprise, but I view ‘gay pride parades’ as offensive and graphic. Until now, I have been tolerant by holding my tongue and not attending what I call a ‘gay shame parade’ but in view of this event, I call Professor Mireille Miller-Young a bully that showed no tolerance. She unleashed hatred towards two pro life (female)individuals. Despite the obvious irony, it is sad to see how her actions have brought on a flurry of hate mail (so called). I will pray for her, her baby and all the people that have been swept up in this episode.

    Quebec, Canada

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 7:50 am

      There is a certain irony about the home of the gay pride parade in So. Calif – West Hollywood – Straights are ‘diluting’ the neighborhood real estate .

  40. andie Reply

    March 15, 2014 at 12:56 am

    Um. everyone has the right to free speech. those two girls did. as do all of the old bitter liberal hating trolls hiding out here on the comments section of a college paper. cheers to you sad kiddies.

    • Guest Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 5:22 am

      You are deluded if you believe that UCSB is a ‘liberal’ school. Genuine liberalism died decades ago. What we have today is merely left wing totalitarianism dressed up as ‘liberalism’.

  41. Ashley Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 10:56 pm

    I wonder if anyone called child protective services against this professor. Last I checked, assaulting a child, causing physical injuries is illegal.

  42. Chaya Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 10:39 pm

    “Isn’t feminism about respecting the rights of all equally?” This is a joke, right?

    • Guest Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 7:38 am

      Thank you. Now we need liberal anti-feminist women to take the place of those pro-life girls. Fighting feminist bigots as men is no fun particularly when most ‘progressive’ women sit in silence as their Twisted Sisters scream hysterical anti-male hatred.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 15, 2014 at 10:26 am

        When I was in college, a long time ago, pro-life women were not allowed to have a space in the, “Women’s Center.” This “women’s,” paid for by student fees, did not welcome all women, but only radical feminists and lesbians. I recall that the “Women’s” center newspaper held a “women’s” retreat. “Women,” were told their children were welcome to come to the retreat, as long as there were no male children 10 or older, because these, “women,” didn’t want any persons who might be hostile. ???

        • Guest Reply

          March 16, 2014 at 1:25 pm

          To feminists a female is only a ‘woman’ IF she’s a card carrying gender bigot in good standing. Everyone else tends to fall into the non-human category. That’s what makes PC so powerful.

          • Chaya Reply

            March 16, 2014 at 2:01 pm

            Yes, that’s why, “Feminists for Life,” are denigrated as not Feminists, University, “Women’s Centers,” only allow radical bigots with an XX or castrated XY’s speech rights.

            A while back some feminist group on tv claimed that women who were quietly leaving the workforce to raise their own children were called, “the enemy,” with their challenge that they would fight a woman’s right to make that choice.

  43. student Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 5:16 pm

    If you want to bring in constitutional legalities, I would argue that while these two “protesters” had the right to voice their opinion regarding pro-life choices, the First Amendment does NOT protect against graphic material and some states have already gone through motions to restrict individuals from displaying images such as this for the very reason that the average person WOULD find it objectionable (see Scott v. Saint John’s Church in the Wilderness).

    It’s one thing to voice our opinions in a reasonable manner, but it’s another to use a shock campaign to push your own moral opinions. What if I wanted to campaign to legalize prostitution – does the First Amendment protect me from posting pornographic images to prove my point? Furthermore, as a PUBLIC campus, many children may by present on campus by way of parents and siblings – powerful as these images may be, this goes over the line of public decency in the presence of younger individuals.

    • JBlack Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 5:44 pm

      I think this is a good argument though I do disagree about your court reference being relevant in this case. Though I can see how it could be. Ultimately that state’s appellate court would agree with your argument BUT the district court disagreed. The US Supreme Court rejected hearing the case… so I see plenty of room for debate on this issue as ended the courts can’t agree and there appear to be different standards/rules for different states.

    • ZimbaZumba Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 7:59 pm

      Which opens the door for those to merely claim they find objectionable that which they disagree with. The yard stick in these situations is what the reasonable person would find objectionable above and beyond freedom of expression; and not what the most strident and powerful find objectionable, such as this professor.

      Free expression of views is a corner stone of a democracy. Most would find being offended and having to look away preferable to the limitation of expression. You do not have an right not to be offended or to indulge in vigilantism.

      I am neither pro-life nor pro-choice, I think this framing is a false dichotomy and the moral question is complex and nuanced. This woman’s actions were akin to meeting breaking and thuggery on the part of a powerful person. Such behavior has no place in a modern western democracy.

    • Guest Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:08 pm

      This at the same university which sexually ‘empowers’ girls to run around nearly naked like baboons in heat and which displays all kinds of shocking sexual material in the Women’s Center’s tunnel of love. That’s ‘indecency’ too but also totally protected free speech as are ALL kinds of shock speech to push ALL kinds of moral opinions. To ban pro-life shock attacks but to encourage all kinds of feminist shock tactics where ‘many children may be present’ is a little lame don’t you think?

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 4:38 pm

      The USSC refused to address this matter and denied a petition for a re-hearing.

      The average person would find billboard-sized self-identified vaginas painted on the exterior walls of ‘womens centers’ such as the one at Yale University as beyond butt ugly. What have you to say about that ? What are you going to do about that ? Then shut TF up.

  44. Trope Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 4:55 pm

    The 16 and 21 year old white sisters have severe emotional problems. They are highly aggressive. They feel justified in showing all women who have had to have abortions photos of our bloody fetuses, children who we might have had. These young white women claim that we women who have suffered abortions should be forced to look at these horrifying photos. Have you seen the photos? They are XXX rated. The young white women want to make we women off all colors suffer the terrifying horrors, and guilt, of what we had to do. These young white women do not realize the terrible choices many of us women were forced to make, and that we live with all our lives. We have make these choices, and the lives of ALL our families and peoples are better for the sacrifices that we have made. The young white women do not care. They only care for their own sensibilities, not the feelings of those of us whose lives they are torturing. These young women were out there terrifying us, terrorizing us, making us fearful to live, ourselves. Now they also feel justified in trying to ruin the life of a professor who has spent her whole life working on behalf of women of color. And tragically, these young white women will win. Because they have no mercy, no compassion, no empathy except for their own imaginations of a perfect world. This is a tragic situation. For these young white women will hound this professor until they can see her bloody end too. And they will feel justified. So sad.

    • JBlack Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 5:18 pm

      fFirst, your descriptions of the teenagers seems very baseless to me. What facts do you have to support your argument about these teenagers? your descriptions seem highly suspect as opinions.

      Second, it seems to me that the professor is responsible for her own actions.I don’t think I understand what you mean when you say the teenagers are ruining the professor’s Life. are you suggesting the teenagers forced the professor to batter them and steal their property?

    • JBlack Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 5:31 pm

      also, I noticed you reference them 6 times as the “white women”. are you inferring this is a racial issue or are you suggesting something else? your references seem to be irrelevant or demonstrate that you have a biased against white people or women.

    • Will Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 6:38 pm

      No one was FORCED to look at anything. I’m on a diet right now. If I see a Girl Scout selling cookies, can I tear down their display and smack them around? At the end of the day, the professor chose to stop and engage and the video shows her smiling. How do you feel sorry for someone like that?

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 7:40 pm

      It looks to me like the professor was the one doing the hounding. Very skillful playing the race card and the victim card at the same time. “…spent her whole life working on behalf of women of color.” Really? Doing what? Encouraging them to have abortions that they were “forced,” to have? You are saying that killing your own people is making the world a better place? And you cry racism? This professor must have felt her status as a, “woman of color,” protected her from criminal behavior, or she wouldn’t have done it. What is your suggestion Ms. Victim? Why does UCSB hire persons who lack basic self-control?

    • ZimbaZumba Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:06 pm

      The emotional problems or lack thereof has no bearing on this issue. You do not have a right not to offended or upset by free speech. Look the other way or simply be intellectually honest. “Trigger” has the now meaning, it means “to disagree with”.

    • Ashley Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 10:39 pm

      These young women (color is meaningless) will win because a grown woman incited aggression against them and then assaulted a teenager. The video shows what happened so don’t try to justify this woman’s actions. It is clear who has mental and aggression issues here and it isn’t the pro lifers. If you are going to be pro abortion then be intellectually honest to acknowledge the reality of what abortion does. Is it disgusting and violent? Yes it is and that is what these young ladies were showing – the reality. This professor has apparently shown more disgusting images in class in the name of “education.” Shame on any woman who justifies one woman assaulting another in this manner.

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 8:05 am

      These are Christian women first and foremost. One attends Thomas Aquinas College, a foremost liberal arts college. What’s with the need to cynically refer to them as ‘white women’ as if ‘white women’ are to be targeted ? I’ve learned that the most ‘racist’ bitches on the planet tend to be non-white; that the term ‘diversity’ is another word for ‘anti-white’ in the Marxist lexicon of the Left. No one has ‘forced’ you, a pathetic female who was somehow unable or unwilling to keep her legs together at the appropriate moment, to make decisions outside of your own control.

  45. Publius 23 Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 2:58 pm

    As an alum, the conduct of this professor is unacceptable. I have spoken with many alums and we grow tired of the radicalization and polarizing of certain “academics”. At the risk of sounding like the old guy (well, I am by your standards), we alums usually watch such behavior with quiet amusement. No more. The “assistant professor” needs to quietly be shown to the nearest exit. The silent majority grows weary of this hate crime and display of intolerance.

    • Amanda Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 3:04 pm

      As a current student, I’m embarrassed that a UCSB alum would say something like that.

      • juandeveras Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 4:04 pm

        You have spent a considerable amount of time writing comments here defending the indefensible. Facts are facts. Deal with facts.

      • TW Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 4:20 pm

        What part bothers you. Do you not think the motivation was hate for the message?

        Do you not think taking things and shoving women is a crime?

        Do you not think physical attacking someone over thier beliefs intolerant?

        The real question is do you believe the freedom and rights only belong to people you agree with.

        Ask yourself, if this situation was reversed, with the attack being against an pro-choice group would you be defending the pro-life teacher?

      • Publius 23 Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 4:34 pm

        Amanda – Keep hitting those books. If you’re not a liberal at 20, you don’t have a heart. If you’re not a conservative at 40, you don’t have a brain.

      • Publius 23 Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 4:36 pm

        I see that you also used the phrase “colored people” in one of your posts below. Good luck to you, indeed.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 10:50 pm

          If Amanda manages to graduate due to intervention of the PC police, then she might be able to practice her verbal skills: “Would you like fries with that?”

  46. Panzy Patrol Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 2:34 pm

    Do you people realize how easy children are to make? Do you realize that abortion is single handedly responsible for the major drop in crimes in the 90s? Pro-life people are awful people who don’t give a shit about the quality of life for their fellow citizens. If you support the death penalty or any form of war, you are an utmost disgusting hypocrite. If you have a pretty penny in your bank account, you aren’t a true christian.

    What this women did was a form of civil disobedience. She will face the legal consequences for this. But her morals are in the right place. These particular prolifers were using a shock and awe campaign on this campus without permission. How about I go around and post pictures of gore all over the place in public? Just because you can, doesn’t make it right.

    • CSU Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 2:45 pm

      Go to a CSU and get a real education. Is this why the UC system is so high priced?

      • Panzy Patrol Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:50 pm

        I don’t go to UCSB or any school in California you stupid fuck. Way to address the points I made though…

        • CSU Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 3:02 pm

          Truthfully your post sounds like a bunch of rambling that should be posted on Craigslist.
          The only points that you make is you hate Christians, hate people who save money, and you idolize Professors that assault 16 year girls. Point Check.

          • Panzy Patrol Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 6:28 pm

            Oh yeah fuck me for caring about the progression of society and bring up relevant points. The fact that you can’t address basic critical topic points reveals you have the IQ of a dedicated christian.

            • juandeveras Reply

              March 16, 2014 at 8:06 am

              What is the ‘IQ of a dedicated Christian’ ? George Washington, should you know who he was, was a ‘dedicated Christian’ Read a book called ‘Sacred Fire’, Bitch !

              • Chaya Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 2:16 pm

                I understand Thomas Aquinas College has pretty high admission and retention standards; students actually have to think and produce work, rather than regurgitate liberal slogans. They are required to study the Great Books, which the author probably hasn’t even heard of.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 10:44 pm

          Do liberals feel the need to use obscene language because they lack the vocabulary to communicate intelligently?

          • andie Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 11:08 pm

            Only when faced with idiot conservatives

            • Chaya Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 3:00 pm

              I wonder how I’ve learned to communicate with both idiot liberals and idiot conservatives without resorting to profanity, which is just lazy and evidence of the quality of vocabulary one gains from playing video games all day and regurgitating polemical memes. You don’t need to speak; just press replay.

        • juandeveras Reply

          March 16, 2014 at 8:02 am

          So you are a troll paid a penny an hour to write drivel on websites ?

      • student Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 5:19 pm

        “go to CSU and get a real education”

        I’m sorry, but I STILL can’t stop laughing at this comment.

    • Summer H. Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 2:59 pm

      What the associate professor did was not civil disobedience. It was a violation of free speech, theft, and assault of a minor (shoving and scratches – via the video and pictures that were taken of the incident).

      You can disagree with someone and protest without resulting to theft and assault. I cannot see that the professor’s morals were in the right place. She should have taken this up with the university if she wanted the signs banned.

      The pro-lifers whether you agree with them or not were there with permission and were not violating policy. To me this is not about the issue being discussed but about the rights of those to discuss issues (free speech) and not be subject to theft or assault.

      If it had been a pro-choice advocates they also have the same rights to protest without fear of theft or assault.

      • Panzy Patrol Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 6:37 pm

        Neither of them are in the right. These protestors are no better than the WBC.

    • juandeveras Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 4:16 pm

      ‘Pro-life people are awful people who don’t give a s— about the quality of life for their fellow citizens’.

      Comment: Pro-life people happen to consider the unborn to be their fellow citizens, fool.

      ‘What this woman did was a form of civil disobedience’.

      Comment: What this ‘woman’ did possibly multiple felonies as well as possibly multiple torts ( go look it up, fool)

      The ‘Women’s Center’ at Yale University had its exterior walls festooned with the detailed anatomical parts of the vaginal orifices of various females – not a pretty site.

      • Panzy Patrol Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 6:30 pm

        So then mothers who have miscarriages should be tried for manslaughter due to their neglect of a fellow citizen? A fetus is what it is, a fetus. They are easy as hell to make. Assuring a quality of life for a human being is hard as hell. Do you care about the progression of society or do you care about forcing others to suffer economically and emotionally due to a prolife agenda?

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 10:53 pm

          “They are easy as Hell to make.” And I suppose you have made and killed lots of them for the benefit of humanity?

          Is the US in a better place economically and emotionally since 1974?

        • juandeveras Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 11:56 pm

          Sweetheart –

          Planned Parenthood would have you believe a ‘fetus is a fetus’.

          A ‘fetus’ is person conceived by God in the womb of a female and it has a father. In many cultures your birthday is considered to be the day you were conceived – not the day you were born.

          Had you any self-discipline and refrained from using abortion as a form of birth control, you’d end up in old age as a far more normal person. You ahve obviously bought into the Planned Parenthood propaganda. Read about all of the women who, later in life, are deeply troubled by what they did at your age.

        • Rubicon Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 12:03 am

          Miscarriage is not a willful act. That’s a really really lame argument. You are reaching in a losing cause.

    • TW Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 4:23 pm

      “What this women did was a form of civil disobedience. She will face the legal consequences for this.”

      I am glad to see someone who supports her prosecution and firing no matter how much you disagree with the students message justice should prevail.

      Maybe there is hope for UCSB after all.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 7:53 pm

      If it was the other way around you wouldn’t have called it, “civil disobedience.” You would have called it a hate crime.

      Yes, I understand how the game is played. Once you play the victim card, the only other cards that may be played are the sympathy and understanding cards. A “victim,” can never be accused or hate, violence or criminal behavior.

    • ZimbaZumba Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:08 pm

      Powerful people indulging in “civil disobedience” is called thuggery. The rest of your post sounds like a promo for Eugenics.

    • Ashley Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 10:52 pm

      Children are easy to make? Clearly you’ve never tried. Talk to someone who has tried for years and then make this ignorant comment. You are either a teen who knows nothing about life and reality or an adult in name only who needs to grow up and get a clue. Your entire post is nonsense.

      • Panzy Reply

        March 16, 2014 at 6:30 am

        Obviously no one who is struggling to make a child is going to abort it, you stupid fuck.

  47. AlanP Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 1:33 pm

    All in all, it is probably a good thing the professor only shoved and scratched the young ladies. At least she did not sit on them.

  48. Mr.Reality Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 1:04 pm

    Thank you, “Professor” Mireille Miller-Young!

    It’s militant, intolerant, regressive bigots like you who will ensure that the Republicans retain the House and re-take the Senate this year. We’ll see how smug you are then.

    Oh, and I took a look at your course offerings. Absolute garbage. You need serious counseling.

    • AG Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 1:49 pm

      Militant?
      “Professor” Miller-Young is the one facing assault charges.
      Intolerant?”
      Professor” Miller-Young is the one sensoring opposing views

    • AlanP Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 2:08 pm

      Mr. Reality,

      Are you telling me you would be first in line to sign up for Feminist & Queer Theory 101?

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 7:56 pm

        It is only her victimhood and whining that funds courses no one wants to take. Next they will force students to take x number of units of BS courses.

        • Student Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 10:33 pm

          No one is required to take her courses, students sign up for them by choice. You clearly haven’t the first idea about UCSB academics.

          • Chaya Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 11:05 pm

            I know my tax dollars help fund her salary and those like her, and my tuition payments help keep her sorry butt on campus. Unfortunately, I know more about UCSB academics than I would like. And I know numerous students who report they sign up for ridiculous, useless courses because they need a credit and the worthless class has space.

          • Mr. Reality Reply

            March 16, 2014 at 10:44 am

            Actually,student, this story tells me all I need to know about UCSB academics.

            And Chaya is correct – as long as public money is being used, everyone has a right to complain about useless “educators” like that horrible beast of a woman.

  49. Raul Garcia Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 1:02 pm

    As we all know this criminal should be charged
    with Theft,assault,etc. What we are overlooking
    is the other students involved with this crime
    should be charged as well, and be immediately expelled. What can we expect from a school which
    actually teaches such mindless dribble? IT IS TIME TO CUT ALL STUDENT LOANS to universities that attempt to teach this type of worthless B.S.

    • AlanP Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 1:39 pm

      Very true, Raul. The actual theft was conducted by two students. The professor was only an accomplice to the theft, and a conspirator in the crime.

    • Summer H. Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 3:04 pm

      I totally agree the assisting students should be suspended pending review (and some type of community service outside their comfort zone) and made to take classes on tolerance.

      What I mean by outside their comfort zone is they would need to meet the requirements by making new signs to replace the one they stole.

      • Will Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 5:32 pm

        Amanda you are undermining women. You think it is ok to take their stuff and smack them around. Your argument is no different than the guy who rapes and says she deserved it because of how she dressed.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 10:58 pm

          It is okay to undermine women, take their stuff and smack them around if they are white and not liberal.

          • juandeveras Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 12:03 am

            This is the core belief of what the Left is teaching Young America. Are the UCSB PC Police going to arrest this Chaya chick ? Where is the Chancellor or Chancellorette on this ?

  50. Rev Donald Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 1:00 pm

    Professor Mirielle Miller-Young committed a hate crime. A crime of violence against someone because she disagrees with their religious beliefs. Professor Miller-Young assaulted a 16-year-old girl and stole her property. The assault caused the young minor girl to sustain injuries. The girl was protesting abortion on the UCSB campus. Professor Miller-Young should be arrested for assaulting a minor. This is unacceptable behavior for a faculty member or for anyone else. Professor Miller-Young should resign her position, as her conduct was uncalled bigoted violence against a minor. Her behavior was in direct contravention of the university’s anti-bullying policies. If Professor Mirielle Miller-Young lacks the integrity to resign it is the university’s duty to protect the safety of their students and terminate this professor immediately.

    • aj Reply

      March 28, 2014 at 4:47 pm

      Sorry, Rev., but “hate speech” is a one-way street only. White people cannot be victims of hate speech. “Professor” Miller-Young will explain it to you and also the 1st Amendment after she finishes her Porno 101 class.

  51. You Are All Idiots Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 12:25 pm

    Ok. Honestly I don’t know what to think about the actions of the professor and all of that, but there is one thing I know for sure: some of these comments on this page are some of the most vile, disgusting and stupidest I have ever read. I weep at the thought that some of these commenters are enrolled in this University. The fact that such idiots can get into this college is a depressing thought indeed. I encourage you all to grow up and actually learn facts and logic. You’re only hurting the world by spreading your special brand of stupid.

    • AlanP Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 12:40 pm

      Yu want the world to take this institution seriously? Then demand that they teach serious subjects. It is difficult to make fun of geology, calculus, physics, business, or accounting. But when the series of study is:

      “Pornography; Sex Work; Black Film, Popular Culture and Art; Feminist & Queer Theory; African American & African Diaspora Studies; Visual Archives; New Media; Ethnography; Oral History” (excerpted from the professor’s own web page)

      laughing at the “so-called” instituion of higher learning is a piece of cake.

      • Amanda Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:54 pm

        Your comment made you sound sexist and racist, in case you didn’t realize it. At the University we don’t accept that kind of behavior. We don’t like to judge, and we don’t like to be judged. You are undermining the importance of women and colored people in today’s society, and your are undermining their past struggles that they had to deal with in order to gain equal status and rights that are parallel to those of the white male. You don’t sound very educated.

        • Your Conscience Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 4:19 pm

          Yes, read that twice. We … Do … Not … Judge.

          Last week a woman married her dog. Do you think that’s wrong, Mr. Tea Bagger Republican??? If so you’re a racist.

          • Amanda Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 4:31 pm

            That’s not racism, that’s beastiality dumbass.

            • Will Reply

              March 14, 2014 at 5:42 pm

              Funny you don’t like to judge except you are calling people names and judging. Were the girls judged by the professor because she did not like their views? I’m confused because you said people there don’t judge.

        • AlanP Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 6:35 pm

          “At the University we don’t accept that kind of behavior”
          That’s the problem. Narrow minded idiots think theirs are the only valid views. You and the professor are two peas in a pod. Anyone who does not share your views may be assaulted and robbed. Anything is justified because they are “wrong.”

          “You don’t sound very educated.”
          I will put my degrees up against yours, if you wish. You sound like a humorless liberal arts major. A Junior, I’m guessing.

          By the way… I am neither racist, nor sexist. I am opposed to stupidity. Colleges are supposed to prepare people for life. A degree in basket weaving, art history, oppressed peoples studies, or whatever other silly liberal arts degree provides a student with very few marketable skills. Sorry. That is just the way it is. Heck, I have two employees working for me with degrees in psychology. One mows lawns and the other is one of my five secretaries.
          Go ahead. Get a degree in porno basket weaving history. See how far that goes in a job interview.

          • andie Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 11:19 pm

            Hey, at least they have jobs.

          • juandeveras Reply

            March 16, 2014 at 8:12 am

            What’s this ‘we’ crap ? Michael Eisner’s sole degree was in English Literature from Davidson. Somehow he was able to run Disney. So much for your theory.

            • Chaya Reply

              March 16, 2014 at 1:43 pm

              English literature requires extensive use of brain cells as well as a high quality of writing ability. I have a relative whose B.A. in English Literature prepared her for a successful career in the communication field, where she fought her way to the top of the hierarchy. However, it would be difficult to find a use for a degree in queer, black, feminist porn, especially if one is not attractive enough to be hired by a strip club.

        • Guest Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 8:18 pm

          Not liking to judge or to be judged is standard practice in female dominated organizations…that is in what Phyllis Chesler calls No Man’s Land and the ‘lesser circles of hell’. The judgment simply goes underground or is projected on some scapegoat…think ‘patriarchal’ white Western males.

          • juandeveras Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 12:32 am

            WTF is a ‘patriarchal white Western male’ given your apparently contemptual context ? Please explain in a manner both reasonable and respectful of ‘white Western males’ and ‘white Western females’.

            • Guest Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 5:26 am

              A patriarchal white Western male is a scapegoat for bigoted feminist females (and males) who believe that he is the source of all human evil historically.

              • Chaya Reply

                March 15, 2014 at 10:34 am

                Yes, they are not responsible for their own evil due to their own victimhood.

                I wish I could find an article I read around 30 years ago where a reporter interviewed women who worked as housekeepers and nannies for well-known feminists, and all claimed they were overworked, not provided with paid leave or workman’s comp, not paid for overtime….all so their enlightened employers could fight for the rights of oppressed women. haha

            • Chaya Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 10:55 am

              According to gender bigots, all white males are patriarchal by virtue of their XY genetics and genes that determine melanin production. They are therefore oppressors unless they do obeisance via repentance and disavowal of their genetics by social castration before the goddess of victimhood.

              • juandeveras Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 8:36 am

                ‘Balls’, said the queen; ‘If I had two I’d be king’. From teh Shakespear play ‘Balderdash’.

        • Ashley Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 10:59 pm

          I’m a woman and will echo Alan’s comments. If you don’t like to be judged, you have a rude awakening coming because welcome to life, adulthood and the job market.

        • juandeveras Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 12:15 am

          Who the f— is ‘we’, b–ch ? There is nothing special about Amanda, the ‘importance of women’, ‘ the importance of past struggles’ and/or ‘equal status and rights that are parallel with those of the white male’.

          Sweetpea, the ‘white male’ is being denigrated nonstop by b—-es such as your ignorant self, and I submit you will live to see a rather substantial in-your-face blowback from America’s Finest sooner rather than later. Women occupy no more than 10 top CEO positions in the Fortune 500. There is a reason – they can’t handle it. What are you going to do about it ?

          • Chaya Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 11:00 am

            It is not true that women, “can’t handle it,” as women have handled far more difficult obstacles than running a major company.

            Statistics reveal that female CEO’s are far less likely to be married and few have children, compared to their male counterparts. So, it is not a lack of capability, but a matter of choice as to what is important in their lives. Feminists would like women to not have this choice.

            • juandeveras Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 11:57 pm

              You assume women and men are co-equivalent in all matters – a denial of obvious distinctions. Boards of directors of the Fortune 500 are not chauvinists they are realists.

              • Chaya Reply

                March 16, 2014 at 1:06 am

                I would think that when an individual is considered for such a highly responsible and demanding position, their personal qualifications are scrutinized, rather than aggregate statistics of whatever subgroup they belong to. The chance of any individual, male or female, becoming CEO of a Fortune 500 company is probably on par with that person’s chance of winning the lottery or being struck by lightening. Personally, if someone handed me the position of CEO along with a magnificent salary, I wouldn’t want the headache. But perhaps this is more personal than it is female.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:00 pm

      Facts and logic = Don’t do the crime if you don’t want to do the time.

    • Student Reply

      March 15, 2014 at 10:35 pm

      Take solace in the fact that most of these commenters are not UCSB students, but idiots who wandered in here with their own agendas. SMH.

      • juandeveras Reply

        March 16, 2014 at 12:01 am

        Take equal solace in the fact that most intelligent commenters here are a hell of a lot smarter and have a hell of a lot more experience in life than you and your sorry ass do. Many even attended universities free of the insipid PC which has become a cancer on your campus.

  52. AlanP Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 12:20 pm

    I can just picture some of the questions on a final exam given by her:
    1. How long is Harry Johnson’s dingus? In inches. Convert to centimeters.
    2. What was the release date of the film featuring the first shaved muffin?
    3. Which actor uttered the infamous line, “My name is Dick Black. Big Dick Black.”

    • Panzy Patrol Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 2:38 pm

      Holy shit you are a special kind of sexist and ignorant bigot.

      • AlanP Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 6:37 pm

        Thank you for noticing.

    • Angry Weasel Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 7:20 pm

      I LOL’d. Thanks.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 11:04 pm

      Alan, perhaps someone will kindly get a hold of her syllabus and post it for our entertainment?

  53. fizo Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 11:13 am

    Obviously she should be fired, convicted of battery, and sued for damages.

    The other question is: how in the world did this person get hired in the first place? Is it really essential to the mission of the university to have an expert on the role black woman in pornography films on their faculty. Getting paid 80K per year, by the way. What other scholars in real academic subjects such as biology, history or physics were not hired to make room for this pseudo-intellectual fascist thug?

    • Amanda Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 3:02 pm

      If you think that educating students in different cultures, sexual identities, colored people’s history, and women’s history are not important, then you must be sexist and racist. It is important for students to learn about these things so they realize that everyone is equal and can show tolerance and love towards someone who is different from them.

      • juandeveras Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 4:30 pm

        Sweetie Pie –

        The Little Pyongyangs around this country known as ‘universities’, which are underwritten by we the taxpayers, yet which maintain lib gatekeepers at all liberal arts departments to filter out opposing points of view, are due for a major comeuppance. Radical feminist freaks like ‘DrMireille’ have taken over many of these departments, have marginalized and reduced the male portions of the respective student bodies and now hold a majority of the student population nationwide. Calling those who disagree with your fascist point of view ‘racists’ and ‘sexists’ suggests you have your own interpretation of what those words traditionally mean. ‘Colored people’s history’ and ‘women’s history’ are probably better understood by the general population than by yourself, but you attach all kinds of politically interpretative crap to the subject matter which renders much of what you say BS.

      • Will Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 5:48 pm

        Sure amanda, there was a lot of tolerance and love toward those girls. If you were really tolerant, you would support them. But I guess tolerance is a one way street for you. Those you don’t agree with should be smacked around and have their stuff stolen.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 8:06 pm

        Amanda, your beloved victim professor didn’t show love and tolerance for someone who was different from her, and neither did you.

        Us racists and sexists don’t hate Obama just because he is black; we only hate the white half of him.

      • Guest Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 8:23 pm

        Let’s see, shall we? Just because I find most of niggardly ‘disciplines’ referenced above to be idiotic, dishonest, and oppressive, I’m therefore a ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’. But my false accusers are ‘tolerant’ and ‘loving’ little ladies and lads who welcome everyone who is different from them.

  54. AlanP Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 11:08 am

    Based on her educational credentials, she is qualified for two lines of employment.
    1. Associate Professor
    2. Fry Cook
    Based on her actions (Theft, assault, battery, destruction of private property, infringing on another person’s right to an opinion), that leaves only Fry Cook.

    • Alex Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 12:32 pm

      Professor Miller-Young only did what most of the students on campus have been dying to do. Honestly those ignorant, offensive protesters are lucky that’s the worst thing that happened to them.

      • Mr.Reality Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 12:44 pm

        Alex must be one of those “non-violent tolerant” liberals, as he advocates violence against another person with a differing opinion.

        Well done, moron.

      • e k Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 12:56 pm

        Alex, I agree. I think it should be open season on all protesters, be they left, right, or center. The whole. “free speech” thing is so over done. I mean really, just think how fun it would be to just jack anyone at anytime if you don’t agree with them. Hey, I have an idea! There have to be some schools in the middle east that would love to have you as a student and you would fit right in. Think of it. If you encountered someone, with whom you don’t agree, you could just cut their head off!! How cool.

        • Mr.Reality Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 1:07 pm

          Nicely said, ek.

          However, since Alex attends UCSB and is a fan of this professor, the sarcasm will most likely go right over his head.

          Maybe one of the business students can explain it to him.

      • AlanP Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:04 pm

        Alex,
        Would you like to know how to counter a viewpoint you find “ignorant” or “offensive”? You counter it with logical debate. You offer viewpoints, and back them with logic and reasoning, which convinces others that you are right, and they are wrong. That is known as free speech. That is known as debate. You do not resort to theft and violence to silence them.

      • Amanda Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:48 pm

        I agree with you Alex. I honesty wanted to yell at the protesters and make a scene, but I was only approached once while I was rushing to class and I didn’t have time.

        • Will Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 5:54 pm

          Hey alex, are they lucky that is all that happened to them? Did you want to smack them around too? But you think they got off easy. What exactly should be done to 16 year old girls that disagree with you?

          • Chaya Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 11:20 pm

            I think he and his buddies wanted to gang rape some minors.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 11:22 pm

          Amanda, did you know PMS is treatable? I don’t know about you, but my kids gave up tantrums once they passed two.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 8:10 pm

        Alex, are you saying we should fear “what we deserve,” from your liberal, tolerant, all-inclusive, diverse buddies?

        It seems the comments have been running in favor of the “offensive protestors,” and against your uncivilized, triggered = trigger happy victims.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 11:17 pm

        Not sure about Fry Cook. What if she gets triggered by the hamburgers she is flipping? Maybe the bigotry of the melted yellow cheese will push her over the edge? What if the racist white customers complain about their food?

        • juandeveras Reply

          March 15, 2014 at 12:24 am

          I’m white, am not a ‘racist’, but suggest you probably are the most racist slug present on this site. Younger female non-whites tend to to be the singlemost collection of racists in our current society.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 11:10 pm

      Not sure about Fry Cook. What if she gets triggered by the hamburgers she is flipping? Maybe the bigotry of the melted yellow cheese will push her over the edge? What if the racist white customers complain about their food?

  55. BP Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 10:44 am

    It falls to universities, especially major institutions like UCSB, to be the protectors of free thought in America. Guarding the right to free speech for all – not just employees or students – is the means by which universities achieve their mission. And it is in protecting unpopular and unpleasant speech that this right is strengthen and preserved. A professor who denies an individual her right to free speech is like a dirty cop. Professors more than anyone else should be expected to encourage and even fight for – rather than against – the rights of individuals to think and speak freely. A professor who fails in this duty does not deserve to be a professor, especially at an institution as prestigious as UCSB. It will be interesting to see how true the administration and faculty of UCSB adhere to the ideal of free speech. Too many institutions of higher education have decided that they cannot trust students to think for themselves and have resorted to instructing students what to think rather than teaching them how to think. Based on the UCSB administration’s initial reaction, it looks like UCSB is going to follow the herd.

    • Guest Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 11:17 am

      You said it, brother(?). Sadly, however, every single UC school violates it’s students’ free speech rights in the Kampus Konduct Kodes. The administrators always follow the faux-liberal herd here in CA…where they can.

    • ucsb student Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 3:56 pm

      There is no doubt that the professor’s actions were wrong and do not conform to the ideals of the University of California, Santa Barbara. However, some blame lies with the pro-life girl. The young “activist” was showing graphic images in the most heavily trafficked part of campus right outside the library. Not every form of speech is protected, and one can make a strong case that showing a bloody dead baby image in a public area constitutes obscenity. UCSB is not a politically active campus, if you want to protest get better grades and go to Berkeley and let the rest of us enjoy the beach.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 8:13 pm

        Only liberals can protest at Berkeley. Any other viewpoint is shouted down, socially isolated, and subject to verbal abuse and physical violence.

  56. Mark S. Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 10:39 am

    Were the photos fake, or were they real? If an anti-war protester wanted to show a picture of a soldier who was blown to pieces to illustrate the horrors of war, so be it. It is what it is. Reality.

    This woman is completely in the wrong. Intolerant. Religiousphobe. Violent. Product of “Big Education”.

  57. AlanP Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 9:12 am

    I work for a state agency at a state office building. If there were two juvenile women outside my office building, holding signs, protesting something I disagreed with, and I went outside, took their signs, shoved them, scratched them, and destroyed their signs, in order to stiffle a message I did not like, my happyass would be fired in less than a day. That is a fact.

    • Panzy Patrol Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 2:51 pm

      Let us know where your office is so we can have some protestors stand out there with vegetarian/abortion porn (aka gore).

    • PhD_Alumni Reply

      March 22, 2014 at 11:43 pm

      I’d agree if it were a private business. But a state agency? Unless you are supervisory personnel and not covered by a union and civil service, you’d likely be safe….since firing a state employee in a union or civil service position is nearly impossible….and certainly more than a one day process. More likely, you’d be quietly offered a buy-out & lateral transfer to some other location/agency to quell the uproar. And a leak to the press would report you were, “no longer with the agency.”

  58. Adam Wood Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 8:47 am

    Why is this thug not already under arrest? And why does she still have a job?

    It’s plainly clear that the university administration is dragging their feet on this in hopes that it all goes away because they just love their far-left fascism on campus.

    Typical Leftist fascism. Nothing new there. It permeates university campuses all over this country.

    • Mr. Reality Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:57 am

      Why is she not under arrest?

      Because she belongs to several “protected” categories, and in that liberal environment, is basically untouchable.

      • juandeveras Reply

        March 16, 2014 at 12:08 am

        Not by federal law or state law.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 16, 2014 at 12:48 am

          Activist judges expand their authority and make law, or twist existing law. I’m sure the poster here who is an attorney could cite some cases.

  59. juandeveras Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 8:40 am

    A comment re-tweeted by ‘DrMireille': ‘ #UCSB campus is NOT a space for hate. I will march alongside @DrMireille until the whining little bigot eats her accusation w/ a barbed fork ‘.

    Apparently this neurotic logic is de riguer and encouraged in the classes of our Wunderkind Porno Professor Miller-Young; a woman being ostensibly paid on the taxpayers’ dime.

    • Michael Val Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 11:08 am

      That sounds like really hateful speech by DrMireille.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 8:21 pm

        Protected class victims are allowed to hate and commit violence in the liberal universe. She couldn’t get a job in the real world if she actually had to work and produce something of value.

        Last time I looked violence against minors was child abuse. I wonder if she abuses her own children? And she is still allowed to be around minors? Aren’t they in danger of her dramatized sense of protected class insulation? Is any student “not of color,” safe in her classroom?

        • andie Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 11:34 pm

          oh how I love the terminology used here. “protected class” “liberal universe”. yes the prof is in the wrong and has violated the law. But its laughable that you use terms oddly similar to liberal’s terms to make a point.

  60. Mr. Reality Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 8:17 am

    This joke of a professor epitomizes the intolerant progressive left who purport to be paragons of tolerance.

    Although I was once an impressionable young college student, it doesn’t mean I was stupid enough to waste my money on a course in pornography.

    No wonder the Millenials are so confused when they attempt to enter the workforce with crapola like that on their resumes.

    Regardless, this behavior was abhorrent, embarrassing and uncalled for. How would she feel if the police came barging into her classroom, roughed her up and confiscated her pornographic course material?

    I hope the Short sisters win big in a lawsuit and Ms. Militant Feminist spends some time in jail, where she can reflect on her poor behavior and intolerance – hey, maybe she’ll make a new “friend” or two!

    UCSB should be ashamed of itself for giving tenure to this joke of an educator.

    Fire her, and set an example for all the other intolerant bigots who work there.

  61. Dave Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 8:14 am

    I don’t understand the logic of some of these comments. What the professor did was wrong. I am a believer in Pro-Choice, but I still think that what she did was wrong. Whether or not they had the right to be there is not the point. She had no right to take the sign, and she had no right or AUTHORITY to do so, let alone use force. The protestors were not in the wrong for trying get it back by following her. In the long run she has done a disservice to Pro-Choice advocates and has given added strength to the Pro-Life movement. Also, please stop with the “triggering effect” b.s. That argument can be used on both sides in similar protest. She is an adult, and my her choices as such. If you are going to do the crime, you have to be willing to do the time.

    • Mr. Reality Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:30 am

      I know- the “triggering effect”. That’s precious!

      But, that’s apparently the best talking point the liberal apologists have to offer, and they’re sticking to it like glue.

      And why would graphic images bother them anyway? According to pro-choicers, it’s just a “clump of cells.” Shouldn’t be a big deal to see it, right? Just like throwing out a chicken carcass after you’re done with it.

      Heck, why not ask the doctor to put the fetus in a to-go bag and use it for fishing bait or garden fertilizer? Might as well be “eco-friendly” while you’re at it, and recycle!

      • Amanda Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:45 pm

        If it’s just a “clump of cells”, then why are pro-choice activists making such a big deal about abortions? I mean, you’re just getting rid of a “clump of cells” that started to grow in your body. Like cancer.

        By the way, women are humans. So yes, if you have had an abortion and see a horrific image of a bloody fetus, it can trigger unwanted emotions and stress that are unhealthy for the human body and mind. It’s similar to PTSD for war veterans. If you think people are just using this as an excuse, then you obviously don’t see the bigger picture of how traumatizing an abortion can be for a woman.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 8:28 pm

          Amanda, you didn’t answer the question. If what you destroyed was just a clump of tissue, why would looking at it disturb you, anymore than looking at your fingernails after you trim them? It’s your right to kill a baby, but your right not to see what it looks like?

      • Panzy Patrol Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:49 pm

        They were showing pictures of late term abortion gore. For someone called Mr. Reality, you’re awfully detached from the reality of abortion and how it has helped this nation and countless amounts of women/couples not ready to have a child. Don’t argue with me though, here’s the actual academic analysis.
        http://qje.oxfordjournals.org/content/116/2/379.abstract

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 8:49 pm

          Perhaps it would help this nation to also get rid of useless tax-sucking idiots?

          Don’t you think a person with a propensity to be “triggered,” to violence is a danger to the public, especially minors? If UCSD keeps Ms. Victim, they are setting themselves to up be sued for $$$$$ if she happens to be “triggered,” again.

    • TW Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 12:43 pm

      Triggering is what some men claim is what happens when they get mad and assault their wives or girlfriends. I think this woman must be pretty desperate to be using that defense. Especially considering the giant grin on her face as her crew absconds with the sign.

      • Dave Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 4:44 pm

        You know, I once saw my ex-girlfriend with her new boyfriend. I should have attacked her and claimed it was a “triggering effect”
        Anyways, we are all reminded everyday of choices we have made as ADULTS. Whether they be good or bad we must deal with them. Whether the images were disgusting or not (And I believe they probably were) still doesn’t give the professor the right to what she did. She may have doing them for what she thought were good reasons, but as an educated adult she knew she was breaking the law and as such she must pay the consequences. The best quote here today was the one by Noam Chomsky. Here is another one, “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum….”

  62. juandeveras Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 8:13 am

    The Gateway Pundit has illustrations in color of scratches on the left and right arms of the older Short sister administered by this two-legged slug. Reference is also made of a video of the entire incident taken by the other sister which has been turned over to law enforcement authorities. It would seem the civil rights of the Short sisters were violated, that Dr. Miller-Young was herself a ‘terrorist’, using the vernacular of the Left, that there may also have been a ‘racist’ component to the actions of Dr. Miller-Young. It will be interesting to see how Santa Barbara County DA Joyce Dudley, a feminist herself, as well as California AG Kamala Harris, always eager to incarcerate any male perceived to entertain any untoward intent involving any female, will address this matter involving one of their own.

  63. stan klein Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 7:44 am

    That video (I realize it is limited vis a vis context) is, as shown, very disturbing public behavior on the part of a UCSB professor. Just very very wrong and does not reflect well on our campus, freedom of speech, or the pro-choice position (though I recognize the latter issue cannot be considered to be seriously compromised by the acts of one individual)

    As for the Nexus, the quotes from the unnamed student concerning the racial slurs directed at the professor show clearly abhorrent behavior on the part of the perpetrator(s). Horrible really.

    But they are not directly relevant to the point of the article — i.e., UCSB professor impinges on the freedom of speech of others and apparently (via video footage) cheerfully steals their poster.

    What is the purpose of the racial slur report? Had it happened during the “incident” I could see relevance. But apparently it did not.

    Better it be contained in a separate article. As it is it seems little more than “well the other side — or some unspecified members there of — can act badly as well.” And yes? How does that relate the acts under consideration. I do not thin that it does.

  64. Thomas Spencer Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 5:50 am

    This person has engaged in uncivil, criminal conduct (assault and battery) in an effort to suppress lawful, free speech of another on a public campus free speach zone. As a trial lawyer with 36 years experience defending constitutional civil rights, I am appalled by her behavior and some of the views published on this thread that this behavior can be justified to “protect” those who heard and saw this free speech. Would anyone support such conduct if the police entered her classroom, pummeled her and took her graphics, notes, etc. and the gagged her to “protect” the students from their views that pornography should not be taught using taxpayer funds? What are the University’s students learning? Apparently, some are not learning to think and certainly seemed to have no understanding of basic constitutional rights and why these exist.

    • Panzy Patrol Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 2:43 pm

      How about I put up pictures of gore, smut, and essentially pro life porn all over your place of business? I’m sure you’d love that.

      • Guest Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 8:57 pm

        He may not love it but I’d be willing to bet he’d fight for your right to free speech as long as you didn’t criminally VANDALIZE his place of business.

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 11:16 pm

        What is pro-life porn? If someone committed such a criminal act, I would contact authorities, not assault them.

      • Ashley Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 11:22 pm

        Well clearly you missed political science and have no understanding of the first amendment. Hear is a hint, the trial lawyer above is not a government agent and his office is most likely private property, so he can restrict the activity that goes on there. The college on the other hand is a public university which accepts tax dollars. Take those hints and see if you can understand the difference.

  65. Fire Mireille Miller-Young Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 3:11 am

    A public university is public property thus they had every right to be there.

    You infringe on the rights for free speach on others, yours too will be infringed upon.

    The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides each citizen with the rights to freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble.

    What the professor did was to violate the law i.e., assault and theft.

  66. MK Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 2:53 am

    She has three degrees all right…

    1. Liberal Cognitive Dissonance
    2. Idiocy
    3. All-around Ugliness

    Typical, though.

    • AlanP Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 7:28 am

      I doubt any of those degrees will help her find a new job. I’ll bet she’s glad Congress keeps extending those unemployment benefits.

    • Andres Riofrio Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 7:53 am

      The only things ugly here are her behavior on Tuesday and the way you treat a fellow human being.

      • AlanP Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 8:01 am

        Just exercising my right of free speech, Sparky.

        • Andres Riofrio Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 8:09 am

          I was responding to the person who called her “all-around ugly.” I’m all for constructive criticism, but I feel that bullying comments like that are unacceptable. You can say whatever you want of course, but I felt the need to add my two cents.

          • AlanP Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 8:21 am

            And my two cents are… The “professor” should be arrested, prosecuted, and fired.

            Thank god my undergraduate and graduate school days came in an age before you could get a PhD in African American, diaspora, pornographic, queer studies. A good, solid education like that sure does not set someone on the road to become a Captain of Industry. What happened to the days when college students took algebra, calculus, chemistry, physics, biology, classic literature, etc.? You know, when they actually learned something of value? I would be ashamed to think my daughters got either their undergraduate or graduate degrees from a California school if this professor represents the education provided.

            Fire her.

            • Mr. Reality Reply

              March 14, 2014 at 8:37 am

              What?

              You mean I can’t get a high-paying job after spending $150,000 on a Degree in 18th Century Gay French Poetry?

              Unfair! Income inequality! Racism! Bigotry! Misogyny!

              • AlanP Reply

                March 14, 2014 at 8:57 am

                I dunno. What’s a associet perfesser make at a Californy collidge?

  67. Amanda Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 1:10 am

    I would not expect anything less from a feminist professor. The images that the pro-life activists used were degrading towards women. They are saying that a woman does not have the right to make a choice about her own body, when in fact she does. They are calling women who have had an abortion “murderers”, and use the term “Holocaust” as if those women are committing genocide. It’s highly offensive, and it is an attack on women and women only. Not men. Sure, the pro-life activists have a right to free speech, but the images they were using can be triggering for students who have had abortions, which makes the University an unsafe place for that student. Also, with the highly-publicized rapes that have occurred recently in Isla Vista, I think all female students very defensive about women’s rights and are on high alert. This could have played a role in the decision of the professor and her supporters.

    • Your Conscience Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 5:41 am

      This Professor stands up for killing babies, and that makes her a beautiful person.

    • Kevin Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 7:53 am

      Wow… You’re a special kind of stupid, aren’t you? The idiocy that you just spewed has made everyone who wasted their time readiong it, a little bit dumber than they were before reading it. You’re arms must be about 12 feet long becasue you are reeeeeeally reaching to try and come up with reasons to justify this woman’s illegal, rude, outlandish, violent behavior. She has NO excuse and should not only lose her job but, should also spend some time in jail and be forced into anger management classes. She is a LOSER! And so are you.

      • Your Conscience Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 12:05 pm

        I was being facetious, but how awful it is to think that people actually think that way . . . sigh . . .

      • Amanda Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:27 pm

        It’s people like you who undermine the war against women in today’s society. Everyone is acting as if this is the first time that someone has protested against an organization. Honestly SAH needs to get the fuck over it. That’s what they get for coming onto a college campus, attacking our students, and calling women murderers. No one fucking likes that, so of course we are going to do something about it. We are COLLEGE STUDENTS. We don’t like racism, sexism and oppression because we are highly educated and we know it’s WRONG. Obviously SAH thinks it’s okay to call women murderers, throw religion around, and openly show horrific images. We don’t want assholes on campus that are going to judge us for our decisions, call us out and make us feel uncomfortable. I mean for fuck’s sake it’s the week before finals, we don’t need this shit right now. As a student, I’m proud that one of my professor’s took action and did something about it.

        • Summer H. Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 3:55 pm

          Given the language in your reply, you may be attending college but highly educated is very doubtful.

          I totally agree that racism, sexism, and oppression are absolutely wrong as are violating free speech, theft and assault.

          You can’t just toss out “trigger” words to justify objectionable and illegal behavior.

          There are people everywhere that are not going to agree with you and that are going to say things that you do not agree with or want to hear. This is a given in life.

          You either need to logically debate them and bring forth your opinion as well, work within the system to have overly objectionable material removed (but who gets to decided that), change the system legally in some way (depending on the circumstances) or ignore them.

          I don’t know how many times I have seen protestors waving signs that I don’t agree with or want to see. However, I don’t attack them and steal their signs and then accost a minor if they try to get it back.

          Your professor may have a Ph.D. (who doesn’t these days) but obviously she knows very little about law, negotiation, or civil disobedience.

          Personally, as you are soon to be in the real world, I suggest you look for a different role model as your Professor has judgment issues.

        • Your Conscience Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 4:22 pm

          Exactly!

          Now go kill your baby.

        • Guest Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 8:55 pm

          We don’t like ‘racism’, ‘sexism’ and ‘oppression’ because we are deeply brainwashed boobs who don’t know the difference between reality and PC fantasy, between right and wrong, and between infantile (female) entitlement and genuine (male) oppression.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 9:08 pm

          Just curious Ms. Victim-Whiner; what is your course major? Profanity? I hear there is really a market for those so skilled in this speech methodology. Too bad all those racists, sexists and bigots won’t hire you. Ms. Feminist professor’s classroom must be a dangerous place. I suppose one must expect to be greeted with violence and foul language on your campus of highly educated losers our taxpayers $$$$ are funding to spout your idiocy.

          1. Its okay to call women (and men)murderers if they are.

          2. Its okay to “throw religion around.” This is called the First Amendment. Read it when you have some free time after your porn studies.

          3. Horrific images are free speech unless otherwise specified.

          You don’t want anyone to judge you or make you feel uncomfortable? Grow up and get a job.

        • Ashley Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 11:29 pm

          No, Amanda, I with my three degrees and professional career, and significant professional work history, extensive travels, and wide degree of reading materials am highly educated. You are a college student. Come back in twenty years when you’ve graduated with higher than one liberal arts degree, have worked a full time job for more than a year or two, and have consistently paid taxes.

          Highly educated indeed. It’s unbelievable the arrogance of the ignorant.

          • andie Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 11:46 pm

            a college student with a voice and right to say as she pleases on this website. “come back when..” what a joke. your accomplishments don’t make you any better than Amanda.

    • Tyroil Smoochie-Wallace Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 11:27 am

      Are you serious? Tell me that your comment is sarcastic. Whether one agrees with what the young ladies did or not isn’t relevant. Whether one saw it as offensive is irrelevant. Amanda, please read the US Constitution paying particular attention to the First Amendment. Following that, read the whole body of law regarding free speech rights. I think you will change your mind.

      • Your Conscience Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 12:10 pm

        Sarcastic — see above.

      • Amanda Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:34 pm

        I know we have rights, I’m a senior at UCSB for fuck’s sake. But this is all about morality. It’s immoral to do what SAH did on our college campus. And all of the hate mail that my professor has received…it’s disgusting. I hope SAH gets charged for slander.

        • Summer H. Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 3:38 pm

          Morality is in the eye of the beholder which is why we have laws protecting free speech.

          By your definition some of the recent hard won advances in gender rights could have had those protestors assaulted and their property stolen because the aggressor did not think them moral.

          The law protects everyone and it is needed because you can’t only protect the rights of the people with whom you agree…

          What your professor did was wrong and if you can’t see it then consider this a teachable moment.

          I do not agree with the Professor getting hate mail but I do think she needs to face the consequences of her actions legally and within the University system.

          • Amanda Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 4:43 pm

            I’m not saying what she did was right, I’m just saying there are reasons behind her actions. Sometimes protest is necessary to make change, violent or non-violent. Do you really think Blacks would have gotten equal rights in the U.S. if they did not protest violently? Protest is a way to bring about change. It can be violent and aggressive, but sometimes it is necessary.

            • Summer H. Reply

              March 14, 2014 at 5:11 pm

              and if the pro-lifers start targeting Doctors and abortion clinics again you would be supportive of their violent protests?

              They rightly or wrongly believe abortion is murder and they are saving lives.

              You never get the choice of having it one way where violence for your cause is right but violence for the cause you don’t believe in is wrong.

              Try reading this with the addition I made: Pro-life …. “Protest is a way to bring about change. It can be violent and aggressive, but sometimes it is necessary.”

              Do you see how your opinion may change with the above if that statement was in support of Pro-life.

              That is why people call for non-violence for all and give people free zones where they can express themselves in a non-violent way.

              Just seriously think if you want people who believe strongly in ways you do not support to follow your advice on violence.

            • Summer H. Reply

              March 14, 2014 at 5:16 pm

              The cause for free speech, freedom from theft and assault, and other violence is a cause that helps everyone.

              I may not agree with what someone says and I may protest it and work to change their minds and the system (which is what should have been done with the pro-life protestors rather than stealing and assault)but I will defend their right to say it and not be attacked (at least physically and illegally).

              Violence does not help and I certainly don’t want to see the days where we have abortion clinic bombings again and murdered doctors. So just as I respect others I expect them and would fight for them to respect me and my opinions.

        • Your Conscience Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 4:24 pm

          Exactly! Now go kill your baby.

        • Ashley Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 11:32 pm

          Slander against who?

      • Chaya Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 9:49 pm

        I doubt it would change her mind. She is too busy studying black feminist gay porn and probably lacks the requisite reading skills anyway. Only victims are allowed free speech.

    • Summer H. Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 3:25 pm

      There are ways to protest and there are ways not to protest. Violation of free speech, theft, and assault are not the ways to protest especially the assault of a minor.

      The professor needs to be suspended and her tenure considered for termination no matter what the out come of the legal system.

      The rights of free speech and freedom from theft and assault protect everyone and no one has the right to violate those rights even if they disagree with what is being said. The professor could have brought this up with the University rather than take the actions she took.

      Look to the causes you support and believe in. Do you believe that someone supporting those causes in a free speech zone should be treated the way the professor treated the pro-lifers?

      A feminist professor who cannot logically debate and argue her position and work within the system to accomplish her objectives does not do credit to the name. Also, assaulting a minor girl is appalling.

    • Guest Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:29 pm

      Actually, the fascist hate movement known as mainstream feminism is degrading and demeaning to women. It says that women entitled infants who deserve to be able to rape rights from men at will. It also insults every woman’s intelligence with stupid sloganeering, false statistics, and hysterical ideological foolishness.

  68. Zach Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 12:56 am

    Miller Young’s actions protected students from the triggering effects seeing those images would have on students. I do think it was wrong for her to have taken the sign though but the protestors did sensationalize this bit of fact because they could have just easily printed and made another one.

    And I don’t think that video taping people without their consent and publishing it online is necessarily legal either. Nor is following someone without their consent (which those protesters did), as well as trapping the professor and the girls in the elevator (which is a minor form of kidnapping) to be very legal either.

    • Guest Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 1:18 am

    • Kevin Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:00 am

      You’re an amzingly dense moron. Filming someone out in public, not legal?!? LMFAO!! Man, you are stupid. Maybe you just crawled out from under a rock somewhere but all you need to do is look at the papparazi filming and photographing people all day, every day. According to the SCOTUS there is no right to privacy in public. You can film and photograph anyone in a public setting whenever you want. This is why police try but cannot legally stop you from filming them. You are just another jackass trying to make excuses for this useless skank’s actions. She broke the law and assaulted a minor. She needs to be fired and spend about 30 days in county, then be forced into anger management classes.

    • Kevin Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:03 am

      Oh, and you CAN follow someone where ever you want, in public. Once they step onto private property it’s a different story. And the girls didn’t forcibly hold anyone on an elevator, you thick headed, fool. How you crazy ass idiots twist facts just blows me away. I really wish ppl like you would do the rest of the world a favor and take a long walk into the ocean and never come back. What a bunch of ignorant losers….

    • Will Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 10:40 am

      Sounds like zach thinks a girl should just shut up and not stand up for herself if attacked. You’re not a nice guy.

    • Michael Val Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 11:20 am

      “And I don’t think that video taping people without their consent and publishing it online is necessarily legal either.”

      Incorrect, when done in public as is the case here.

      “Nor is following someone without their consent (which those protesters did),”

      Incorrect, when done in public as is the case here (and assuming no restraining order).

      “as well as trapping the professor and the girls in the elevator (which is a minor form of kidnapping) to be very legal either.”

      Correct legally, but incorrect factually as they did not trap the prof in the elevator.

      It would be difficult to get more things wrong in one post than you achieved. You have demonstrated such little factual and legal knowledge that your opinions are worthless.

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 10:08 pm

      You have to videotape gender/ethnic whatever victims. She would have accused the minors of attacking her and committing a hate crime. One does not need permission to follow someone in a public space, nor to enter an elevator with them, especially when they have stolen and destroyed your property. I suppose you can’t read The Constitution either and so feel you can make up your own victimhood laws at will? People who commit crimes don’t have a right to privacy.

    • PhD_Alumni Reply

      March 23, 2014 at 12:15 am

      Zach, “video taping people without their consent” is perfectly legal if done in public spaces where the subject has no reasonable expectation of privacy. And it’s been upheld by every Federal court that has considered the issue. Non-private areas of the university like walkways and building lobbies? No problem.

      As for “following someone without their consent…” Seriously, they were on public spaces of the campus following people who had stolen their property and committed battery upon them. You seem unclear on the notion of “pursuing criminals.” And seriously, “trapping the professor and the girls in the elevator?” The prof. and her student minions *entered* the elevator on their own accord. The young ladies pursuing attempted to enter and were *physically prevented* by further battery upon them….including an attempt to wrest the cell phone from them. (attempted robbery).

      While your unrelenting attempts to paint the victims of these crimes as criminals while justifying the true criminal acts of Miller-Young and her co-conspirators suggest you might have a bright future as a CRIMINAL defense attorney, may I suggest you actually learn something about the law first? Assuming you actually have the grades to get into the Law and Society program and eventually a law school.

  69. jb Reply

    March 14, 2014 at 12:26 am

    As someone who doesn’t really hold a strong position on the issue, I see it this way: their signs are graphic, but so are pictures of animals being tortured in factories and of child victims of the military industrial complex, and I believe those images are fine to use in a protest (perhaps you disagree). Just because an image is offensive, does not take away from the importance of the message that it conveys. To the young protesters, their cause is to support the voiceless, and whether you agree with them or not does not diminish their right to express that. Imagine a not-too-different scenario: a pro-Israel protester taking away a sign graphically depicting an injured Gazan child. In that case, the person stealing the sign would be facing the wrath (rightfully so, as that would be pretty messed up) of the same people who are now defending Professor Miller-Young’s actions. To quote Noam Chomsky: “”If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Stalin and Hitler, for example, were dictators in favor of freedom of speech for views they liked only. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.”

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 10:14 pm

      The injured Gazan child was injured by a rocket directed at Israel that misfired. There were also photos of dead Syrian children killed by their own people labeled as victims of Israeli aggression. Same process.

      But interesting none of the opponents of graphic animal parts nor the Jewish students harassed on UC campuses were “triggered,” into violence. Only Ms. Supersensitive minority feminist who wouldn’t last a day in a real world job.

  70. 18th Street Reply

    March 13, 2014 at 11:32 pm

    Fire the pornography professor.

    • Your Conscience Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 5:38 am

      Agreed. She’s a monster.

  71. Tim Reply

    March 13, 2014 at 9:55 pm

    “She’s pregnant, so she’s very sensitive to horrifying images like that,” the student said.

    I saw the video. The professor was smiling as she took the sign

    • David Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 11:35 am

      VERY keen observation Tim, I bet the lawyers for the the two girls from the Survivors of the Abortion Holocaust would like to know that one, if they didn’t catch it….that blows the “triggering effect” defense right out of the ball park, doesn’t it…?

  72. Max Vincent Reply

    March 13, 2014 at 8:50 pm

    Interesting…If these students are from Thomas Aquinas College, and the school did not sponsor or support the protest, who gave the group permission to be at USCB? Why wasn’t this question asked? If Students For Life didn’t know they were going to be there, and it sounds like the university didn’t know they were going to be there, who allowed them access? What was a 16 year-old girl doing there on a school day? If members of the anti-abortion protest group are, indeed, from Thomas Aquinas College, why was a 16 year-old in their midst? So what if she is a sister of one of the anti-abortionists? Did she cut classes? If you want to participate as an adult, in adult endeavors, and act as an adult at a university (which is for adults) then you be prepared to accept what comes your way as an adult would.
    Regarding this “assault” by Professor Miller-Young: All this group needed was a catalyst to set them off. They were waiting for a spark and Prof. Miller was it. A pregnant professor, who had to walk past this group’s repugnant attempts at getting anyone to pay attention to it, well, they got what they wanted. (This happens a lot more than they want you all to know about. This happens outside of every Planned Parenthood clinic, outside of clinics that provides a necessary and needed service to women who make a medical decision between their doctors and themselves.) They like to think they are making a difference. They aren’t, but it makes them feel good to say that. I commend Professor Miller-Young for standing behind her convictions. I am sure it was not easy, especially when you realize that these folks were right there tailing her, following her, actually trying to place all the blame on her. But they do NOT remain blameless. They do bear responsibility in this, because if they had not been on campus, with whose permission remains unknown, none of this would have happened. Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should, folks. I look forward to seeing the rest of this play out.

    • GauchoGrad Reply

      March 13, 2014 at 8:56 pm

      UCSB is a public university. They have a right to be there. Just because speech is repugnant or because you don’t like it doesn’t mean you get to shut it down.

    • PlainlyStated Reply

      March 13, 2014 at 9:23 pm

      In an adult world, everyone is allowed to express their opinion. Others don’t censor, just because they happen to be pregnant, or because they happen to be an associate professor, or they don’t like an opposing view. You see, you’re supposed to learn those things when you go to this thing called a university, especially if you’re teaching other individuals to use their brains – or to just become little fascists like you. To call yourself a feminist, while taking away the rights of others to express their views smacks of the same subversive, discriminatory actions that a feminist is supposed to rally against. That is, unless it serves their own agenda. So please, spare me the banal justifications that your adult professor was somehow justified in attempting to disrupt the free speech of another individual because she didn’t like the message and drug along her little minion students to help her. And as surprised as you may be? Home-schooled students are allowed to step foot into the world, away from the public school system, and even allowed onto college campuses to engage in protest. It’s called advocacy, and it doesn’t require the blessings of you, or those who only believe in free speech when it benefits their feminist or racist agenda.

      • Max Vincent Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 1:05 am

        Gee, PlainlyStated–your bias is showing. Professor Miller-Young isn’t my professor. You must be so tired from jumping to conclusions. But she had more right to be there than did an anti-abortion group from another college. You sound someone who doesn’t really care about the issue at hand. Since when does being a feminist mean you have to lie there like a rug and be walked all over? Where did you ever get the idea that feminism means you are supposed to let everyone else have their views/viewpoint while you give up the right to express yours? And since when is it against the law to “disrupt the free speech of another individual” because you don’t like the message? It happened to the president of the United States, it happens in Congress, and it happens on college campuses all over the world every day of the year. Students do it to their instructors, whether they be TAs, associate professors, full professors or doctors. Don’t even think this is a freaking novelty. There are few repercussions, if any. Rarely does anyone get censored. All of a sudden, an anti-abortion group is all butt-hurt. Sounds to me like their message wasn’t well-received and this is a good way to get publicity. Why were they protesting, by the way? Why a protest? What were they protesting against? Was there an opposing viewpoint? If not, why protest then? Isn’t a protest without an opposing side an exercise in futility? Or is it just attention-seeking behavior?
        They are all just drooling about keeping this in the news. Publicity, whether good or bad, is still publicity, right? I’ve done my research; this has been picked up by all of the Catholic anti-abortion newspapers and magazines. Oh how they are drooling all over this. They rarely get something like this. To them, this is manna.

        And please–don’t even purport to call me a fascist. You see, public universities allow all kinds of thought–especially thought that says women are equal to men and abortion is legal and just because it is a public university it doesn’t mean you belong there. It is not advocacy when your message divides more than it unites.
        You call me a fascist but your brown shirt is showing.

        • Guest Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 1:26 am

          I’ll call you a fascist for Plainly.

          Your passages below are particularly telling. You’ve obviously never visited A Voice for Men or listened to GirlWritesWhat. You also obviously haven’t done your homework on the fascist ideological foundations for feminism either. The irony in your protests is beyond absurd.

          “Since when does being a feminist mean you have to lie there like a rug and be walked all over? Where did you ever get the idea that feminism means you are supposed to let everyone else have their views/viewpoint while you give up the right to express yours? And since when is it against the law to “disrupt the free speech of another individual” because you don’t like the message?”

        • Thomas Paine Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 4:51 am

          What frightens me is that you have no idea just how uneducated you are.
          The second letter in UCSB stands for California. That means the university is owned by state of California. That means it is owned by “we the people”.
          Your parents are getting ripped off. Save them some money… drop out of college, get a job at Starbucks and go to your local library and find a book on the Bill of Rights. You may learn something.

          • Max Vincent Reply

            March 14, 2014 at 5:56 am

            You are another one who can’t stick to the material at hand and, instead, gets a hard-on insulting people who don’t see things the way you do. Don’t talk about my parents. Don’t worry about my education. Don’t worry about my employment. All of that is quite secure. Worry about yourself. Worry about how this affects you–not about me.
            There are public universities all over the U.S., T.P., who have restricted “free speech” by restricting who has access to their university’s public space. This information is out there; you would have found it if you had bothered doing some basic checking. It wasn’t difficult to locate. The reason(s) they cited for restricting the speech was because it was inflammatory and it was prejudiced. It was also because the groups wanting to speak were not student groups, nor did the groups contain any students as members. In denying them access, university representatives said that they did not have a “compelling interest to provide these groups access to the university.” In other words, not everybody has to have access to the university just because they want it. And these were public, not private, universities. So yes; it is being done and it has been done. Now you learned something.

            • AlanP Reply

              March 14, 2014 at 7:22 am

              Whether or not the girls had the right to be on campus is not the question. The question is whether or not th professor had the right, and authority, to deny those girls ability to peacefully protest. The professor did not have that right. Nor did she take the sign from them because she did not think they had a right to be on campus. She took their sign because she did not like the message. That is an infringement of freedom of speech. She should be fired.

              • Zach Reply

                March 14, 2014 at 10:35 pm

                The girls had not right to put those signs up. Per university policy, graphic signs must be acknowledged by the office of student life before they are put up, and the protesters did not do that. They disrespected university policy and harassed students of their choice to abortion. I have no sympathy for those girls and hope that they are banned from the university forever.

                The professor’s not going to get fired. She has tenure and her associates and the committee at UCSB are very fond of her and probably would have done the same if she had not done it. Her biggest penalty should be paying 5 bucks to the protesters for taking the sign, in exchange for the group’s permanent ban at UCSB.

            • Guest Reply

              March 14, 2014 at 11:26 am

              The public schools all over the US who restrict free speech are in violation of the Constitution. Tiny little free speech codes are illegal. So is restricting ANY kind of ‘hate speech’ that doesn’t involve imminent threat of violence. In other words everyone certainly does have access to public universities but only about 15 or so are in compliance with the Constitution. The rest will, in time, follow because schools which violate the law always lose when cases come go to court.

            • Chaya Reply

              March 14, 2014 at 10:29 pm

              “Inflammatory and prejudiced,” is vague enough to apply to anything. But I assume it only applies to what “triggers,” the protected pc crowd.

          • andie Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 12:51 am

            Good Grief I just love these “drop out of college” comments. anyone with different viewpoints should just drop out and remain uneducated. sounds terribly familiar.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 11:30 pm

          “it is not advocacy when your message divides more than it unites.”

          Sounds like you have been studying psychobabble crap.

          Yes, women are equal to men, and pro-life women are equal to racist, bigoted, victim-entitled feminists.

      • Guest Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 1:14 am

        Western universities the world over are bigoted bastions for infantile but officially coddled gender bigots: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0 This professor was smiling because she thought she would get away with her attacks…which is a fair assumption on a Kampus like UCSB wherein even the administration loves to coddle PC bullies, wherein the campus speech codes/policies silence free speech, and wherein there are so many brainwashed, ignorant, or ‘triggered’ boobs willing to add insult to injury on free speech violations. This is in the final analysis Woman’s favorite way of communication…and thus will be very very hard to completely eradicate from female-dominated academic covens.

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 10:24 pm

          Please don’t blame intelligent, educated and hardworking women of all backgrounds for the behavior of ignorant, talentless beneficiaries of PC affirmative action.

          • Guest Reply

            March 15, 2014 at 5:32 am

            I’m not. There are SOME fine women who DO communicate responsibly but they are fairly rare because female biology tends to drive indirect female aggression. I’ve also never heard a single woman at UCSB deliver a ringing condemnation of feminist gender bigots or of the other ignorant talentless women (and men) who RUN the PC academic racket there.

            • Chaya Reply

              March 15, 2014 at 10:30 am

              Those who huddle in fear of social ostracism deserve what they get. A coward dies many times; a brave man (or woman) dies but once.

              • Guest Reply

                March 15, 2014 at 6:00 pm

                Indeed.

    • Stubbs Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 8:13 am

      As an employee of a public university, the professor violated the Constitution of the United States. This sort of university-sponsored censorship has been found illegal so many times that it is unbelievable that there are people still creating elaborate sophistical arguments to support it. The only question is why are universities allowed to again and again cover for lawbreakers like this professor. It amounts to racketeering. Watch for the mealy mouthed acknowledgement or wrong doing and gentle pat on the wrists of the perpetrator, after months of “deliberation.”

      • Panzy Patrol Reply

        March 14, 2014 at 2:55 pm

        It’s plain and simple an act of legal disobedience in the face or morals. The truth is, abortion helps this country in ways you wouldn’t know. People who are prolife don’t give a shit about the quality of life for their fellow human though.

        http://qje.oxfordjournals.org/content/116/2/379.abstract

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 10:27 pm

          Perhaps the billions of taxpayer dollars that fund abortions in the US and worldwide could be put to better use improving the quality of life for one’s fellow human? Maybe you aborted someone who would have improved yours and others’ quality of life?

        • Chaya Reply

          March 14, 2014 at 11:31 pm

          That’s news. Thanks for showing me that assault is legal disobedience.

    • Will Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 10:49 am

      Hey max, here is the summary of your opinion: “Sometimes I like to defend people who smack around 16 year old girls as they are stealing their stuff.” I wonder where you learned this was ok, Max?

    • Chaya Reply

      March 14, 2014 at 10:20 pm

      “…be prepared to accept what comes your way in an adult world.” Um, does that include violence? Must stay out of adult worlds if we don’t want to be assaulted.

      “..if they hadn’t been on campus…” Sooner or later some other trigger would have triggered Ms. Trigger happy.

      PS: I was a college student at 16. Campus outdoor space is public. Since you admire those who stand behind their convictions, is it okay with you if I stand behind my convictions with violence also? Or is that just for your oh so victimized persona?

  73. RB Reply

    March 13, 2014 at 8:00 pm

    This “professor” needs to be fired. It doesn’t matter whether anyone agrees with the two young women protestors or not… what matters is that they have their 1st Amendment Rights to exercise free speech… and aside from that, nobody has a right to steal someone else’s property… ever… and aside from that nobody has a right to put their hands on another in an aggressive manner… ever…

    How dare she…

    • aj Reply

      March 29, 2014 at 12:18 pm

      RB, I think you may be forgetting that “Professor” Young-Miller is being “oppressed.” Think of the heights she would have scaled if she hadn’t been “kept down” by the “racism” of our system. Oh, the horrors!

      CULTURAL MARXISM: The Corruption of America – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIdBuK7_g3M

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>