Sounds like @LifeAtPurdue includes some ‘good,’ old-fashioned rape threats.

Jeez.  White people:

A Purdue University staff member is being investigated after he allegedly threatened to rape pro-life women during an online debate about the campus pro-life club’s recent campaign.

The Purdue Students for Life group has been facing a heavy backlash this week after its members put up posters around campus that focused on how the abortion industry targets black women and their unborn babies for abortions. In coordination with Black History Month, the campaign posters read “Hands Up, Don’t Abort” and “Black Children are an Endangered Race” and included the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter.<


Then on Wednesday, the team at Students for Life reported the discovery of a violent threat against pro-lifers by Purdue staff member Jamie Newman. Newman reportedly called for the rape of pro-life women in an online comment on Live Action News.

You can imagine what happened next: yup, this week’s Captain Dumbsh*t not only threatened to commit rape, he gave out the telephone numbers of the local police department and FBI, because Captain Dumbsh*t didn’t understand that Purdue University has to take this kind of thing seriously. No, really, they do.  Especially when Captain Dumbsh*t finished his threat with “*giggles* (like a girl).”  Because while you may or may not think that people in general aren’t taking the threat of rape seriously, it’s pretty clear that Captain Dumbsh*t here didn’t. But why should he?  The dude assumed that he could say anything he liked about conservatives, after all…

24 thoughts on “Sounds like @LifeAtPurdue includes some ‘good,’ old-fashioned rape threats.”

  1. Because he has CorrectThink(tm), he will suffer no consequence. That’s truth of how SJW operates. As long as you operated within the current accepted Truth, you are well within right to strike out against the WrongThink(tm) heathens.

      1. Once again, the pro-lifer are WrongThink(tm). All actions against WrongThink(tm) are allowed and encouraged.

        1. No deed done in service to the [Commie] Red god can be a sin. This thread was not rape because this woman is already a gender-traitior and as such, a non-person.

          1. He is doing a great job at Purdue. He is holding tuition down. He handled the demands of Purdue’s version of Mizzou protestors well. He changed some rules on faculty making it harder for them to retire, collect pension benefits and then come back to teach and make fat paychecks on top of that. He ruffled feathers when he took a stand against Zinn’s version of American history. He is disliked by many for some of this stuff.

          2. … and either he needed to handle this better, or we’ve got a partial sound bite…
            Better would have been:
            “We are not terminating [individual] at this time, however we have placed him on administrative leave without pay and are referring the case to the appropriate authorities”.

          3. I didn’t hear the sound bite. Problem with these nut cases is that they do or say horrible things, the obvious thing is to get rid of them post haste, but then the unreasonable university community and/or court system unleash a s$$$ storm over what should have been an easy call.

            Either that or he (Pres Mitch) just didn’t get it right.

  2. His being white had nothing to do with it.
    His being a brain dead leftist, does.
    Granted, had he been a Black Panther, he wouldn’t have threatened, he’d have just done it.
    And been protected by the same people.

  3. Proposing that women be raped as a form of punishment is something that you expect to come out of Pakistan. Yes the guy is joking, but I still see that threat as very anti-woman (I am a woman). It is just not something to be joked about. I know these guys like to claim that supporting abortion makes them “better” at supporting women, but this isn’t a guy I’d trust or want around any woman I care about.

  4. Here is the reply I received from my email to [email protected] :

    The following is a statement from Steve Schultz, Purdue legal counsel, on the recent controversy related to an online post by a part-time Purdue staff member:

    “As we’ve already indicated, a threat of rape is outside the bounds of any definition of protected speech. And if it appeared that Mr. Newman had any such intention, he would have been terminated immediately. But the police investigation tells us that there was, and is, no real threat to the campus community. That finding does not foreclose the possibility of other employment-related actions based on Purdue’s internal complaint processes.

    The disruption we’ve endured as a community is entirely due to Mr. Newman’s online posts. Anything other than a full apology and explanation from him about the intent of his statement will be insufficient to cure the harm he’s done.

    It’s fortunate for Mr. Newman that he works at a public university both obligated under the First Amendment and committed by principle to protect free speech — even speech as abhorrent as his. Had he uttered such an outrageous and vulgar statement while working for a private college or other private employer, he would almost certainly have been fired on the spot. Mr. Newman’s obnoxious rhetoric is an embarrassment for Purdue, but our special obligations as a public institution impose a much higher threshold before condemnation can be extended to punishment.”

Comments are closed.