Forgive me for doubting whoever gave this assignment is really interested in thoughtful discussion and debate with me or my children about anything. There is no balance at all in these discussions anymore, only agenda. And then we all go back to our respective echo chambers.
I wonder if there was a time when people complained that universities no longer welcomed an open discussion of the merits of slavery? I think it’s difficult to say how open people should be to old ideas, as opposed to new ones.
I truly believe we are polarized in this country when conservative students only attend conservative schools and liberal students are not exposed to Christians. (I mean the kind that go to Haiti and build water wells, they listen to Christian music and volunteer at the homeless shelter and are the real deal) 
Not to make light of this but I think when you connect with people and you work at a charity together, you understand that it is OK to say you disagree. Our faith is very important to our family. It helped us get through the loss of my 3 year old niece to leukemia last year and it helped me when my mother died from cancer as well. My son believes there is more to this life than simply today. We all believe that God loves everyone regardless of color or whether you are gay. But, we truly believe it is not what God wants. How does this affect us? Not very much actually. We are still friends with people of all persuasions and we still pray for them just like we would those who are like us. Not everyone who does not support a gay lifestyle is a rabid idiot. I do not support banning books and I do think the kids involved were probably young and immature. But, weren’t we all at 18?
loukydad: On a previous thread you wanted to discuss whether an evolution/intelligent design/creationism discussion would be welcome in a college classroom. Some of us told you the overwhelming majority of faculty and students (at schools like Duke) would be uninterested in such a discussion. So, you are correct there is no balance some places in some discussions. The discussion may not even exist. I think you are an excellent parent to investigate this before your son applies to colleges. You shouldn’t be surprised by campus culture if you visit campuses and look at college websites. The colleges aren’t trying to hide their “agendas.” Fit is very important in my opinion. I
eta: When my kids were applying to colleges, Duke was on the lists of least gay friendly colleges. Now it is on the most gay friendly lists, though not at the top. I only know this because I keep up with this aspect of campus culture.
woodlandsmom: I am so very sorry for your family tragedies.
There are many groups at Duke that consider themselves Christian. They will be on the website. The main campus is dominated by a Chapel. The Chapel community, however, is very welcoming to the gay community. I am pretty sure there will be gay weddings there in the near future, if it hasn’t happened already, though I don’t know that for sure.
In my world gay marriage accepting Christians are real deal Christians. My niece is involved in all the activities you mention, and her church supports gay marriage.
There are plenty of Christians at Duke. A kid from my church goes there.
See https://chapel.duke.edu/community/religious-life for a list of campus religious organizations.
@alh “On a previous thread you wanted to discuss whether an evolution/intelligent design/creationism discussion would be welcome in a college classroom. Some of us told you the overwhelming majority of faculty and students (at schools like Duke) would be uninterested in such a discussion. So, you are correct there is no balance some places in some discussions.”
It isn’t correct to say there is no balance. The reason no informed person is interested in this discussion is that it has been settled science for over 100 years. There is nothing new to discuss. All of the substantive scientific evidence is that evolution happened. They do not want to have that discussion in the same way that they do not want to debate whether the holocaust actually happened, whether the moon landing was fake, whether the stork theory of reproduction is actually the right one, or whether the earth is flat. All of these things are resolved science. That does not mean that people aren’t open to debate. It just means that if you want to debate them, you should have educated yourself about the issue and then have some actual new evidence to contribute. Saying that you haven’t looked at the evidence, but you just don’t believe it because of what it says in Genesis is not a substantive scientific argument. It is like showing up on the first day of a class on ancient Rome arguing that the professor first needs to prove that the Romans existed. It is just not a fact that is in dispute based on evidence and reason.
/#203 - Hunt, the condescension it takes to make that sort of analogy is the essence of what I am talking about.
Cutting right to the chase here because I am busy these days. Setting aside that there is any moral element to such a debate at all.
Are you for the normalization of all consensual sexual relationships between adults? What about when we move on from Heather has two mommies to Heather has three mommies? Two mommies and one daddy?
I been telling people all of my life that I am male. What does it mean to be a male? Is there any such thing at all, or does being male or female really only exist on some sort of continuum?
If I were to limit myself to the shallow thinking and principles in such “new ideas” employed by those who presume the right to frame the debate on these topics, I just can’t get comfortable with that on any level, intellectual or otherwise.
from pizzagirl
It’s not uncommon at all kinds of colleges. My son was assigned a freshman experience book in 2006 at a regional LAC. It’s a take-off of the one city, one book trend: http://www.csmonitor.com/Books/2011/0915/One-City-One-Book-what-5-cities-chose-to-read/Seattle-Little-Bee-by-Chris-Cleave
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/06/04/books- Colleges that do freshman experience books.
Now who’s making absurd analogies?
My point is similar to the one about evolution that Much2learn just made: there are some philosophical and ethical issues that nobody wants to discuss any more, because hardly anybody takes the “other” side of the issue. There are few (if any) defenders of slavery, for example. With homosexuality, there are obviously a lot more people who disagree with the current trend of thinking, but their arguments are largely based on religious beliefs. As such, it is very difficult for them to make arguments that are persuasive to anybody who doesn’t share those particular religious beliefs. So what’s to debate? You can have a pretty good debate in a religion class on how to interpret the Bible, I suppose.
The young man’s explanation of his reasons for deciding to not read Fun Home, in his own words -
Personally, I don’t agree with his decision. But I don’t have a problem with it. No fatwas are being promulgated. He’s not calling for censorship or for the members of the committee that chose the work to be publicly castigated or fired. He’s not even calling for new selection guidelines to be instituted or for trigger warnings to be posted. He’s just writing about his decision to opt out of a voluntary assignment, which doesn’t restrict anyone’s academic freedom or chill their ability to pursue lines of inquiry or expression.
I do think this young man would benefit from a discussion about theories of ethics and what duties of conscience are imposed on someone by their religion. Hopefully he’ll explore this topic at Duke, and hopefully the campus community will be supportive of this.
Those who have access may want to compare the discussion in this thread to that in the Duke class of 2019 Facebook page.
Context is everything.
The original incoming freshman who objected to reading Fun Home took to Duke’s FB to air his objections. He didn’t just choose not to participate in a “suggested” group activity. He challenged the choice of book in a very public forum and was joined by others who objected for similar reasons, without having ever even picked up the book.
I think that’s why many folks have reacted strongly here. Nonetheless, it’s been a fascinating conversation.
Also this:
That’s pretty much EXACTLY what the most successful businesses do if they want to remain competitive. They market down to the smallest segments they can. Demographics and “psychographics” are a huge part of marketing.
It seems to me that this young man could have asked somebody who didn’t have these objections to black out the offending images so he wouldn’t have to see them. That would be consistent with his statement that he wouldn’t object to reading a memoir about the same topic.
But I thought his statement wasn’t bad at all. I suspect that a lot of people just don’t believe him.
You don’t find a statement like this provocative, @Hunt?
Or this from another student who backed Grasso up?
Re #209 and three parents
Already in existence, due to donated mitochondrial DNA.
Re #211 and defenders of slavery
Daesh is an example of a group that defends and practices slavery. Of course, it is reviled by just about everyone else.
“but their arguments are largely based on religious beliefs. As such, it is very difficult for them to make arguments that are persuasive to anybody who doesn’t share those particular religious beliefs. So what’s to debate?”
Respectfully, no. That’s nonsense. One doesn’t have to be religious to know that he is male. There is a basis for such a determination in natural science I believe. For most people, even those who are not religious, this is hardly an old idea. I can think of about a million reasons why I want to hold onto such an idea without bringing theology into the discussion at all.
I can smell such a debate on this right around the corner. This is where it is going next, once we have all surrendered on the current one.
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/18175407#Comment_18175407
Sure, it’s provocative, partly because it’s kind of true. I think it’s something sensible people could discuss.
One might think the distinction between reading about something and seeing a picture of it is kind of silly, I suppose. But it’s still quite different from objecting to the point of view of the work in question.
I would expect such topics are discussed in sociology or religion or philosophy classes fairly often.
Not in bio or chem or physics though.
loukydad, apologies if I’m misreading you–given the context of your post, this appears to be something that you mean somewhat ironically or facetiously. But it’s the kind of subject that I find fascinating. What DOES it mean to be male or female? Is there a continuum of gender identity? There are certainly ways in which men and women now behave (at least in the western world) that would have been roundly mocked or questioned a century ago as being inappropriate for a man or a woman. So what is innate, and what is cultural?
D1 is working as a software engineer in Silicon Valley. D2 plays college rugby. Not typical female behavior. Not everything about being male or female is about who you find attractive.
Slithey Tove - was I being facetious? I wish I could say yes, but no I wasn’t. Given where we are going today, it has now become a very real question. Fascinated is not quite what I feel when I consider it.
BTW - I love your CC name. I really wish I would have been as clever when choosing my own. I hadn’t thought about that poem in years and you have me now anxious to share it with my youngest when he is ready.