SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the debating-whether-something's-debatable dept.
It looks like anybody can be against academic censorship, as this opinion piece in the Washington Post shows:
Wisconsin's Supreme Court can soon right a flagrant wrong stemming from events set in motion in 2014 at Milwaukee's Marquette University by Cheryl Abbate. Although just a graduate student, she already had a precocious aptitude for academic nastiness.
On Oct. 28, in an undergraduate course she was teaching on ethics, when the subject of same-sex marriage arose, there was no debate, because, a student said, Abbate insisted that there could be no defensible opposition to this. (Marquette is a Jesuit school.) After class, the student told her that he opposed same-sex marriage and her discouraging of debate about it. She replied (he recorded their interaction) that "there are some opinions that are not appropriate that are harmful [...]
[...] McAdams, a tenured professor then in his 41st year at Marquette and a conservative who blogs about the school's news, emailed Abbate seeking her version of the episode. Without responding to him, she immediately forwarded his email to some professors. She has called McAdams "the ringleader" of "extreme white [sic] wing, hateful people," a "moron," "a flaming bigot, sexist and homophobic idiot" and a "creepy homophobic person with bad argumentation skills."
Because there is almost no Wisconsin case law concerning academic freedom that could have guided the circuit court, McAdams is asking the state supreme court to bypass the appeals court and perform its function as the state's "law-developing court." He is also asking the court to be cognizant of the cultural context: Nationwide, colleges and universities "are under pressure" — all of it from within the institutions — "to enact or implement speech codes or otherwise restrict speech in various ways."
[Post-publishing edit: An A/C below helpfully provides the following far more neutral reportage by Inside higher Ed titled Ethics Lesson which explains the situation with more light and less head. Thanks A/C - Ed. (FP)]
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Tuesday January 09 2018, @05:36PM (19 children)
What do you think of "Civil Unions"?
Not a "real" marriage in the eyes of many but grants equal legal right to same sex couples as mixed sex marriages.
Or do you think some people should not get the same legal rights and protections as others due to who/what they are?
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 09 2018, @05:56PM (17 children)
I would be perfectly fine with that. I offered that often, in discussions in the past. But, the same SJW's who insist there is no difference between males and females demanded that there be no difference, even in terminology, between gays and straights.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Tuesday January 09 2018, @06:02PM (14 children)
Count me in. There shouldn't be, for the institution of marriage. (I'm not the sort who denies sex differences, though, for what that's worth.)
'Separate but equal' doesn't work. The institution of marriage has recognition and legitimacy within society. It should be extended to same-sex couples. It doesn't do to invent a new, roughly equivalent institution, with a different name.
You end up with absurd situations where people end up apologising for casually saying "marriage" when they were 'supposed' to say "marriage or civil union", lest they be accused of excluding gay couples. (And yes, exactly this 'scandal' has actually happened. I believe it was here in the UK.)
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 09 2018, @06:05PM (12 children)
There's no scandal unless people give a damn. I don't give a damn who might be offended, so there can't be any real scandal. I certainly won't call a gay couple "married".
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 09 2018, @08:44PM (11 children)
Eliza and I may just track you down and send you a wedding invite :) You know, just to piss you off. 'cause hey, guess what, asshole? You don't get to define reality. Sure, maybe it won't be a church wedding on account of me being some sort of Deist and her basically an atheist, but hell, we can go to a Unitarian "church" if we really want to.
It bothers you to no end that gays and lesbians can marry, and we're all laughing at your suffering. Shoe hurts when it's on the other foot, doesn't it? Eat'cher liver.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Wednesday January 10 2018, @10:49AM (10 children)
That isn't an argument, it's gloating. Who modded this Insightful?
It's not my intention to take Runaway's side here, but really now, do better.
What a waste of good letters. People who oppose gay marriage have been saying exactly that for decades! It's no less unhelpful when the same nonsense is spouted by our side now that we're winning.
Trump supporters say the same thing when they gloat about Trump dismantling Obamacare. Empty hostility. No content whatsoever.
Again you sound like a Trumpite. How about communicating some actual arguments and points? All you've said boils down to I support gay marriage and my side is winning so screw you.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday January 10 2018, @04:28PM (9 children)
That's all he ever had. All I'm doing is giving back the only thing he's ever been able to do. You don't know the guy but trust me, he's not here for reasoned debate...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Wednesday January 10 2018, @05:16PM (8 children)
Oh come on. If I caught you throwing your own shit at a monkey, would you tell me He started it?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday January 10 2018, @08:36PM (7 children)
If the monkey started it, yes. Odds are good I wouldn't engage in a shit-flinging contest, though; if it were a small enough monkey and I could get to it, I'd just grab it and wring its neck.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 11 2018, @02:35AM (1 child)
You're a pretty small monkey yourself - it might be YOUR neck that was wrung.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 11 2018, @04:11PM
A six foot woman is small now? I'm taller than most men (which I'm sure annoys the piss out of them). Probably taller than you too, AC.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Thursday January 11 2018, @09:31AM (4 children)
...right. I think I've made my point.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 11 2018, @04:09PM (3 children)
You have, but you've made it in the context of the assumption that we are dealing with a sane, rational human being here. We are not. Several days ago he and I had a long back and forth during which he revealed that he revels in being "asocial," looks down on anyone who isn't, and plainly stated that if he doesn't give a damn about something, it doesn't matter, and if he does, ONLY his way of thinking matters. To him. Because see "asocial." Which is closer to solipsism than anything.
We are not interacting with a normal human being here. The guy's a walking mass of complexes, and every now and then he'll slip up and show a little of how fucked up he is. There is no dialogue with a solipsist.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Thursday January 11 2018, @04:13PM (2 children)
No, I quite explicitly did not make that assumption.
Behaving like an unthinking animal is not defensible, whether or not you are in the presence of animals.
I don't even need to take a position on Runaway here.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday January 11 2018, @04:15PM (1 child)
You know, I like most of your posts, and you seem reasonable enough, but you're falling into whataboutism here. Don't assume any two posters are equally sane, knowledgeable, or rational. We have some real headcases on here...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Thursday January 11 2018, @04:33PM
Sure, Runaway is prone to spouting utter garbage. I'm not suggesting you're in the same league, I just figure you've got little excuse not to rise above.
When you visit the zoo, you don't fling the monkey poop back, any more than you'd angrily shout at the sky for raining on your day off.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 09 2018, @08:49PM
What if you go one step further: abolish "marriage" from the legal lexicon - only have "civil union."
So gay or straight, you need a "civil union license" from the court, and then frolic off and do whatever ceremony with whoever you want but turn in your damn signed paperwork and enjoy filing your taxes as "civily-unioned filing jointly."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 09 2018, @07:36PM
Hey, Runway! Everybody knows that same-SJW marriage is not allowed, and even mentioning it is hurtful. Please leave this thread immediately.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Wednesday January 10 2018, @12:18AM
Thank you, that was where I thought you were coming from but wanted to be sure.
I've always felt that "marriage" is more of a religious institution, with different religions/cultures having different views of what is and is not a "marriage". Personally I think we should stop calling the legal document a "Marriage Certificate" and just call it what it is, a "Civil Union" where two people have decided to give each other full legal permissions and responsibility over the other persons life and leave the "marriage" to whatever religion they follow.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday January 09 2018, @07:13PM
What do you think of "Civil Unions"?
I think when people say thing are "separate but equal" they're usually lying.