<p>Why would that be relevant? Oral Roberts University doesn’t PRETEND to be academically neutral. Everyone who applies there KNOWS that there is a worldview being promulgated. The problem is that a religious worldview is defined as “not secular” and a secular worldview is defined as “neutral” rather than “anti-religious”. I’m glad to see that the secular worldview is going to be examined, since in many ways it’s less academically rigorous than a religious worldview, not more so. . .</p>
<p>“I’m glad to see that the secular worldview is going to be examined, since in many ways it’s less academically rigorous than a religious worldview, not more so. . .”</p>
<p>I’d be fascinated to hear in what ways. </p>
<p>A religious worldview is, I would think, based on “faith”; that is, blanket, unquestioning acceptance of a religiously-defined set of “truths.” The specifics, of course, vary depending upon the religion.</p>
<p>A secular worldview is based largely upon the submission of scientific proof. (Do note that, according to this definition, there are a number of world views that, although not perhaps technically “religious,” are in effect so.)</p>
<p>It seems pretty clear to me which group is more academically rigorous.</p>
<p>Even when I went to college, I got a lower grade because I called my prof on some “facts” he gave, which weren’t true. I know some of my students who came back to visit with me won’t voice their real opinions because they fear retribution. So I would say there is no REAL dialogue going on.</p>
<p>Interesting thread… I feel there is no such thing as a centrist. A centrist for the most part is usually a lukewarm liberal. (screams from everyone here).</p>
<p>Anyway: I have heard through the athletic grapevine that this year, Drew University is requiring students to sign a pledge similar to U of Delaware’s, forfeiting their constitutionally guaranteed right to free speech to “quell the tide of hate speech on college campi.” (I’m sure they wrote “campuses” though, which drives me insane.) Does anyone know if that is true? I can’t get the Admissions folks to confirm or deny and really don’t feel like driving to New Jersey to find out!</p>
<p>While I abhor racism, homophobia, and all of the things that a reasonable person would normally consider 'hate speech," I also abhor the idea of identifying certain things as “hate crimes” and “hate speech” and assigning them special status. </p>
<p>If an act is wrong, it is wrong. The fact that the act may be motivated by unreasoning prejudice, instead of by greed, for example, is irrelevant. IF you have an prejudice against gays, but do not act upon it, it’s your problem. (And your loss.) If you assault someone, your motivation for doing so should have no bearing on the classification of the crime.</p>
<p>The reason that the outcry in favor of “hate crimes” classifications grew, as far as I can see, is that law enforcement all too often chose NOT to prosecute people when the victim was gay, or a person of color, or a woman, or whatever. And society all too often let bullies get away with targeting the same groups. What we need is impartial enforcement of the laws, and impartial enforcement of civility.</p>
<p>The declaration of “hate cirmes” and “hate speech” amounts to the same thing as declaring “thought crimes,” IMHO.</p>
<p>F-mom–don’t want to debate politics with you, but why does “campuses” drive you crazy? It’s the correct plural according to every dictionary I’ve checked. In English, anyway–but that’s the language we’re talking about, right?</p>
<p>Fencersmother, I’m dying to know if that Drew requirement is truly in place. Can you imagine if kids aren’t told this policy in advance of applying? If they don’t sign, do they have to take a forced gap year?</p>
<p>Re: post #46, I was also puzzled by the insistence on correct Latin usage. If we are going to be purists, that sentence would take the ablative. In the singular it would be campo and in the plural it would be campis. I don’t think many readers would recognize either as the proper form of campus (es).</p>
<p>Garland: I grew up with my Latin scholar father calling them campi, and where they all play football are not stadiumS! So, I am not saying it is incorrect to say campuses - it just sounds wrong to my ear!</p>
<p>I am going to call Drew this week and see if I can’t someone to confirm this. I’ll let you know!</p>
<p>Ah, that’s different! Your Latin Scholar dad must’ve had a tough time,going through life trying to apply the rules of one language to another…and then he goes and passes this on to you! English is so interesting (or maddening) that way–it comes from so many different sources, yet it has its own set of rules–the borrowed words following a whole new set of marching orders when they get here!</p>
<p>(sorry-thread hijack).</p>
<p>As far as I can tell, the whole “enforced political correctness” theme is a propaganda strategy of the far right. I can read the anecdotes, too, but one rarely encounters anything similar in real life. “Everybody knows” that university faculty are monolithically leftist, until one examines who is actually on specific faculties, at which point it becomes clear that a diversity of views is represented almost everywhere.</p>
<p>(And NB: The University of Delaware just ditched its diversity awareness program so criticized in this thread.)</p>
<p>But if you right-wingers really want to put a dent into the liberal hegemony in higer education, here’s my suggestion for something effective to do: </p>
<p>First, work to elect progressive, democratic-socialist candidates for federal and state office, especially top executives. That will create enormous reformist energy in government, and it will suck many of those liberals right out of academia, just as the Reagan-Bush years decimated conservative ranks on university faculties by giving many of them something better to do than sit around and complain.</p>
<p>Second (overlapping with the first), try to get a punitive, progressive income tax system enacted. Something that will meaningfully diminish the attractiveness of investment banking and m&a jobs for top students of a conservative/realist bent. Maybe supplement that with oppressive regulation to restrict the profitability of financial businesses. Without mind-boggling compensation to entice them into the real world, brilliant conservative scholars will once again, as in times past, opt for the untaxed intangible and fringe benefits of university faculty positions.</p>
<p>
Jessie, fwiw, my D’s experience is not quite the same but similar. She’s the moderately liberal kid, who grew up in a very liberal area and is going to a very liberal college and sometimes finds the PC and the echo chamber a bit wearing.</p>
<p>JHS: snarf. Yeah, a lot of conservatives would rather participate in the oligarchy, with maybe a brief time in government to help preserve the oligarchy, rather than dedicate themselves to a lower-paid career in academia.</p>
<p>FM: I’m a centrist and consider myself a dedicated evolutionary.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, Adigal, I am happy to read that a centrist seeking newer ideas than “too old socialist” terms does not hesitate to resort to the timely crutches of Darwin, Dickens, or the French Revolution. Did you miss a rallying song? </p>
<p>Avanti o popolo, alla riscossa,
Bandiera rossa, Bandiera rossa
Avanti o popolo, alla riscossa,
Bandiera rossa trionfer</p>
<p>JHS, if
, then why exactly did the University of Delaware
. I would think that they would instead try to defend their reasoning for the “pogram” and would try to educate other institutions on their forward thinking.</p>
<p>Just kidding by the way, don’t anybody get their panties in a twist - oh wait, that was a sexist remark from another thread.</p>
<p>For those interested in the conference, short summaries of papers presented are available in pdf format:</p>
<p>[AEI</a> - Events](<a href=“http://www.aei.org/events/type.upcoming,eventID.1595,filter.all/event_detail.asp]AEI”>http://www.aei.org/events/type.upcoming,eventID.1595,filter.all/event_detail.asp)</p>
<p>Meanwhile, at Columbia University:</p>
<p>“Professors Clash Over Bollinger”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Professors</a> Clash Over Bollinger | Columbia Spectator](<a href=“Homepage - Columbia Daily Spectator”>Homepage - Columbia Daily Spectator)</p>
<p>If you want to know about PC and colleges check out [FIRE</a> - Foundation for Individual Rights in Education](<a href=“http://www.thefire.org%5DFIRE”>http://www.thefire.org)
If you want to follow a story about PC on campus read the real story about Lawrence Summers former President of Harvard.
If you want to know who is minding the universities Id say women in their late 50’s whose politics and education are more akin to Hillary from Wellesley. The Duke boys were crucified by these types on the other hand some feel men should behave at all times and if you punish them harshly they will tow the line and not turn out like Bill. Depends on your viewpoint.</p>
<p>Coffeenchicory1,</p>
<p>The Duke boys were not crucified by Hillary types (Duke chancellor is a man), they were crucified by a DA who was pandering. Look at what is happening to Nifong now</p>
<p>No the profs at the school crucified them remember that poster? And did you follow the case on TV. Every night a different feminist attorney appeared slugging away at the boys reputations. You dont recall that? Nifong spent one night in jail. Oh my positively scary! True he lost his license but to me that was the minimum.</p>
<p>Nifong, Durham and Duke are all being sued. He will pay in so many ways. Yes, I saw the nightly news including Jesse Jackson offering to pay her tuition.<br>
Next,
I am on your side with this arguement. They were convicted before they were charged… they will never be able to get past this. One of them said for the rest of their lives if someone “google’s” their name this will always pop up. Can u imagine being that young and the rest of your life is an uphill battle.
Finally,
It isn’t Hillary types, it is our “new” society that believes it is owed to them and “Goals 2000”— we can’t hurt their feelings.</p>