Sure, I'm going to go right out and say it...
I, for one, am glad:
FIRE calls the University of Delaware out on its unconstitutional residence program
and
UDel President Patrick Harker realizes he doesn't have a legal leg to stand on
Feel free to discuss: I don't plan on disabling the comments for this one.
9 comments:
"At a public university like Delaware, this is both unconscionable and unconstitutional.”
Don't we do something like this?
10:53, no, we don't mandate participation in any activities.
I'm sort of worried we're not getting the whole story here.
From wikipedia:
"in contrast to many other groups that describe themselves as concerned with civil liberties, FIRE has received much greater praise and support from commentators on the right"
FIRE supported a Christian Fundamentalist group at Tufts when they refused to allow a lesbian member to serve on their "Leadership Council". FIRE argued that discrimination based on sexuality is a religious freedom, not to be infringed upon. delightful.
Anon 11:44: How predictable.
Look more closely at FIRE's activities, history, and leadership before you selectively quote (from Wikipedia, no less) the bits you don't like. FIRE's strength is that they do not pick and choose based on ideology.
I'm not saying that I disagree with them in this instance. It's just that this post only supplies us with one news story from an obviously biased source: FIRE's official site.
My point (that I failed miserably to convey) is you shouldn't tell us to "feel free to discuss" when we're woefully uninformed about what we're supposed to be discussing.
I felt uninformed, so I went looking for more info. Admittedly not very far, but I learned something. I think that's a hell of a lot better than a knee jerk reaction to FIRE's actions based on what FIRE tells us.
And come on. Defending flagrant discrimination as religious freedom? Bullshit.
the FIRE site gives wesleyan a "red light" status.
If this is an attempt to complain about BiLeGeTa by proxy, you've got really no legs to stand on.
Many schools have core curriculum requirements, or at least did traditionally. Your high school amost certainly did. Wesleyan does not. If forcing anybody to learn anything is "unconstitutional reeducation," then you've got an issue with the entire concept of education.
Direland, please stick to hosting porn on the network.
hey, i didn't know you write for wesleying. hi! :)
Oh, I know this is a private university, anon 6:30... and I have no problem with BiLeGaTA, or any of a number of voluntary workshops I went to as a frosh. I think you're confusing education with thought policing - not only were these programs mandatory, they required students to agree with them. Indoctrination is the exact opposite of what higher education is about.
And I was lucky to go to a high school where open classroom discussion - yes, discussion - was the norm.
Anonymous, please stick to criticizing open discussion of important issues like freedom of thought. We all know that our differences disappear when we all acknowledge that some people are right and others are wrong. Clearly there are no areas of life where rational people might disagree for perfectly understandable reasons. In fact, if they did exist, we oughtn't talk about them. We are at college, after all.
Post a Comment