Terrorists off-limits but Christians fair game

Status
Not open for further replies.

Battlespace

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Messages
310
Location
It depends on where I happen to be
I hope this posts okay - I received the article this noon from a source in Kentucky.


Terrorists off-limits but Christians fair game
by Brian Yates

December 01, 2004

The faculty at UC Berkeley has a set of guidelines designed to keep professors from pushing their personal agendas on students. These guidelines were established to keep the campus from becoming a sanctuary for communist professors. Teaching should “stick to the logic of the facts.†This policy was largely forgotten until recently when a course catalogue for a “Politics and Poetics of Palestinian Resistance†class warned that “conservative thinkers are encouraged to seek other sections.â€

This type of agenda is to be expected at Berkeley; I doubt too many of you are surprised. It’s somewhat less expected; however, here at U of L. While “Social Stratification†sounds somewhat less threatening than the Arafat love-fest mentioned above, and its course description neglects to warn students of any political persuasion to “enter at their own risk,†the lack of tolerance for conservative opinion is no less prevalent.

The Thursday following President Bush’s resounding reelection, K.C. Martin walked into a class discussion of the election among the students and her professor, Dr. John McTighe. With much of the class upset over the outcome, one student asked how we managed to reelect “such an idiot†president.

Many exit polls suggested that voters considering morals made up a significant part of President Bush’s voting block. Dr. McTighe took this one step further when he said, “It was the religious zealots who say they are voting on morals. I think we should all buy AK47’s and shoot them all! That’s what I would suggest, if it were allowed.â€

McTighe saw no problem with making this type of statement in class because apparently he felt among friends. According to Martin, “on several occasions the teacher [McTighe] said we were all liberals, so he probably assumed it was okay to bash Republicans.â€

Understandably, Martin was upset: “I was offended that he would say such a thing…he has no idea what I believe. I don’t think that gives him the right to assume every student is a liberal and he can say whatever he wants.â€

McTighe contends that he qualified his outrageous comments by saying “Yes, I’m being sarcastic,†and that while he does believe “religious zealots†were partly responsible for the president’s reelection, his reference to guns came while discussing the “implications of a widely perceived connection between fervent religious beliefs and support for gun ownership.†Not to get off the subject here, but maybe this “widely perceived connection†could be more that people who support the First Amendment also just happen to support the Second Amendment as well. You know, all those nuts who actually believe in upholding the Constitution.

McTighe told university officials that he said people should buy a weapon to protect themselves from those in the gun ownership movement. (Note: it’s not a movement; it’s a constitutionally-protected right.) He may as well have claimed that he was suffering from “post-election selection trauma†and knew not what he was telling his class.

The scorn for all of us professing to believe in God is clear in McTighe’s obscene remarks to his sociology class. The reason for this is simple: liberals feel threatened by God. Op-ed pages across the country were echoing with shouts that voters making decisions based on their morals is bad for America. It’s not bad for America; it’s bad for liberals.

Let’s put this in perspective here: liberals have spent the past three years whining about the need to protect the rights of terrorists. Remember the uproar over classifying detainees at Guantanamo Bay as enemy combatants? We were told that we should have more concern for the rights of terrorists. What about giving Saddam the death penalty? Oh, how inhumane! Liberals won’t allow us to shoot terrorists and murdering dictators, but if you believe in God, not only should you be shot, but they want to use an assault weapon.

Many of you are probably incensed at McTighe’s words right now; however, I’m prepared to let him off the hook. He’s understandably upset following a difficult election. He is in luck though; the American Health Association is offering free counseling for those afflicted with Post-Election Selection Trauma. He seems to be in dire need.


Brian P. Yates is a junior majoring in accounting and the Publisher of the Louisville
Patriot. You can e-mail Mr. Yates at [email protected].


Dr. McTighe should be disciplined by the university because of his comments. Sarcastic or not, you can rest assured that had he told his class to buy AK47's and go out and shoot homosexuals because they didn't vote like he felt they should, he would have been fired.

Please send the email to Dr. James R. Ramsey, President of the University of Louisville, [email protected].

Also, please call Dr. Ramsey to express your concern and ask him what kind of disciplinary action he plans to take. His phone number is 502-852-5417.
 
Just reaffirms what I have always believed, i.e., that extremist liberals harbor far more violent fantasies than any conservative gun-owner.
 
...extremist liberals harbor far more violent fantasies than any conservative gun-owner.

Yep. Unfortunately, one of their "fantasies" is packing both the federal and state judicial systems with leftist extremist judges who aren't the least bit shy about legislating from the bench.
 
This reminds me of a similar situation I experienced. I was standing around after school with some of my friends (all but one was a liberal pothead :rolleyes: ) after the election results were in and some other guy they know walks up, obviously unhappy. He starts ranting on how they should all buy guns and take it to the streets against the people who voted for Bush. My conservative friend and I just stood there laughing to ourselves at the idea of these jackasses trying to just pick up a gun (all of which were going to be "AKs and Uzis") and use it against a bunch of people who actually know how to use them.

Strangely, none of them has taken any steps towards gun ownership. ;)
 
People have a habit of often saying stupid things. Some Cali professor ranting about Palestine is great, Bush is bad? Uhm, hardly surprising. Even idiots have the right to an opinion. Stating a desire to kill people because of the way they voted in an election? Now there I have a problem.

That said, we also have conservatives that say "Nuke every Islamic city."


Ironically, I did have one class that did teach us uhm, understanding of terrorism groups. "Sociology of Terrorism", taught by a former Marine. We were to examine the beginnings of various terrorist groups, and study their brains as much as possible. When you have an enemy, you need to know as much about them as possible.
 
Extreme generalization about groups of people causes a lot of deaths on all sides.

For being so ignorant on a vast number of subjects, people are remarkably sure of their opinions. I think the world could use a little more humility, and restraint from forming biases from little actual experience.

The ability to put yourself in the other person's shoes does wonders for understanding. How many of you have stopped and thought about what it would be like to be a Palestinian or a liberal school teacher? I don't imply that you should change your opinion, or not form opinions, but people's inability to talk calmly about contentious issues leads to conflict, in my view: and if the Israelis and Palestinians need anything, it's some calm negotiation rather than more shooting.
 
The whole premise is wrong. The Dems lost the election because they had the wrong candidate, screaming how the Dems are the party of the liberals.

It is true that people that are too headstrong about moral agendas need to be kept out of government. They at least need to be kept in check. Wanting to kill "the others" or even having that occur as a comment is a "zealot" position of its own. It's clear that a very large number of folks need some serious therapy. The only dismay I have is how some people can get so separated from reality. It helps to try to be objective, and that is what young people should be learning how to be.
 
The first time Bush won a guy at work (who's Jewish, the significance of which will appear below) said that they should just round up all the conservatives and ship them someplace like Arizona, because we don't want them here in NYC. I asked him if the relocation would be done in the time-honored fashion, in old boxcars and cattle cars. He didn't know what to say.
 
What are sorely needed on college campuses are non-liberal students with the balls to call bullsh*t when this happens. I have done so on a couple occassions, but I've been fairly fortunate so far as to bias. One of my professors was a Democratic candidate for Congress, and even during the campaign he controlled himself in the classroom.

When the comment about shooting all the "religious zealots" that voted for Bush was made, a student should have risen to his feet and declared, loud and clear and in no uncertain terms, that the professor must be out of his mind to think such a statement was appropriate, especially in the classroom.

Or, alternatively, take the standard lefty tactic of complaining that he was feeling oppressed, or offended, or whatever the current term is.
 
Lets see.
Christians turn the other cheek.

Muslim extremists slit your throat ear to ear.

Leftist bash Christians.

The right bashes Muslim extremists.

So this means…..
 
Here is their reply:

Thank you for contacting the University of Louisville with your concerns
about a story discussed in an opinion column that appeared in a student
publication. I appreciate your interest and concern about this report.
When a statement like that is attributed to a university professor --
even if not true or taken out of context - I can understand that you
would be concerned.

While individual personnel matters are confidential, I can assure you
that we take concerns raised about faculty conduct seriously.

When an issue about a faculty member's classroom conduct comes to our
attention, an appropriate administrator, typically a dean or department
chair, looks into it. Based on the findings of the investigation,
disciplinary action may be taken. We encourage students who have
concerns about faculty behavior to notify the university directly so we
can gather facts and address problems.

In regard to the specific incident you mention in your note, you should
know that the author of the column was not present in the classroom (but
heard about the statement from someone else). As we have looked into
this specific report, we have received versions of the discussion
distinctly different from the one reported by the columnist. University
policy prohibits us from discussing specific personnel matters, but
based upon the information we have, we do not believe that any serious
threats were made to any individual or group. If we receive additional
information from any individual in the classroom, we will investigate
further.

Beyond this individual question, however, we are taking the opportunity
to remind all faculty of our academic policies and standards. The
university's "Statement of Academic Freedom," located in our governing
document, speaks to the rights and responsibilities of students and
faculty. Students, for example, have a "right to express their own
views on matters of opinion" . . . "without fear of arbitrary reaction."
Faculty have the responsibility to "be thoroughly prepared and well
informed in their fields of knowledge and to be scrupulous in
distinguishing between personal and professional judgments. . .." You
can find the full policy at
www.louisville.edu/provost/redbook/chap2.htm#SEC2.5.1.

The university also accepts the professional standards set by the
American Association of University Professors, a professional
organization that concerns itself with faculty rights and
responsibilities. The AAUP guidelines state that "teachers are entitled
to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should
be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter
which has no relation to their subject."

AAUP standards also state that students should have protection against
improper academic evaluation. This theme is echoed in U of L's own
student code of rights and responsibilities, which states that students
"shall be evaluated on demonstrated knowledge and academic performance
and not on the basis of personal or political beliefs." Students who
have concerns may attempt to resolve the issue informally with the
faculty member, chair, dean or another university official. They may
also pursue a formal grievance through the academic department and
college.

I hope this information is helpful. We do not take student concerns
lightly, and we do have standards that address faculty conduct and
student rights. Our goal is to ensure that the university respects the
deep diversity of ideas and values among all members of our community.

Sincerely,

Shirley C. Willihnganz
University Provost
 
What are sorely needed on college campuses are non-liberal students with the balls to call bullsh*t when this happens. I have done so on a couple occassions, but I've been fairly fortunate so far as to bias. One of my professors was a Democratic candidate for Congress, and even during the campaign he controlled himself in the classroom.

Come to an engineering college. Conservatives way outnumber liberals here.

I may be stating the obvious, but doesn't the idea of not letting people vote who don't agree with you seem a little un-democratic? Maybe, something like a dictatorship would do?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top