Image 01 Image 03

Stanford Students Brand Campus Second Amendment Event as ‘Act of Intolerance’

Stanford Students Brand Campus Second Amendment Event as ‘Act of Intolerance’

What’s next, protests against the First Amendment?

This is an event being organized by the College Republicans. How exactly is a constitutional right an act of intolerance?

Campus Reform reports:

Stanford students use ‘Act of Intolerance’ policy against College Republicans

Students at Stanford University made several “Act of Intolerance” reports about a Second Amendment event promoted by the Stanford College Republicans.

The event was designed to help students “procure and maintain a firearm under the letter of the law as well-informed and responsible American Citizens.” Although members of the Stanford College Republicans organized the event, the club did not officially sponsor it.

The first draft of the registration form included the question “Did K*le R*ttenh**se do anything wrong?” referring to Kyle Rittenhouse, the Illinois teenager charged in connection to the shootings of three people in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Students could respond with the answers “No,” “Yes. He tagged #3 but didn’t bag him” and “Decline to answer without a lawyer present.”

In response, Stanford students reported the form as an “Act of Intolerance,” according to the Stanford Daily.

Stanford Student Affairs defines an “Act of Intolerance” as “conduct or an incident that adversely and unfairly targets an individual or group on the basis of one or more of these actual or perceived characteristics: race, color, national or ethnic origin, sex, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, veteran status, marital status or any other characteristic protected by applicable law.”

Stanford Student Affairs’s website clarifies that the Act of Intolerance protocol is “not a judicial or investigative process.” The goal of the process is to “provide a path to resolution for the affected individuals or community who need to heal.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Its not part of the Leftist’s living breathing constitution the rest of us follow know as the US Constitution

Shut up you intolerant weasel! You’re interrupting my tolerance. I feel unsafe! Stop it!

How does this target anybody?

    Barry Soetoro in reply to randian. | October 24, 2020 at 10:43 pm

    Some claim all three shot by Rittenhouse were Jews. None was religious, but they’d be a targeted ethnicity?

    All three were likely convicted felons. Is that targeting people with a disability?

      artichoke in reply to Barry Soetoro. | October 25, 2020 at 10:55 am

      Yeah, a 17 year old had previously checked the genealogies of the people who were going to attack him that day. They get this idea from what, last names?

      First, I doubt that it’s true. But if it is, it’s irrelevant. He shot them because they were attacking him, not because of who they were.

    MajorWood in reply to randian. | October 25, 2020 at 1:09 pm

    It directly targets snowflakes, which they want designated as a protected entity.

Individuals who need to heal have the opportunity to stay away from this talk. The “intolerance” protocol is simply a reduction in the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment.