The argument that it’s so obvious our side is right the other side should be supressed for annoying us and being a nuisance has had a rather spotty history: it was invented, after all, by slaveholders to justify slavery.

Perhaps sometimes the argument really is correct. But we know for sure that sometimes it’s been wrong.

Unless it is permissable to debate and discuss the issues, we can never be sure which way it will be in any given case.

omigod…

Bill Poser: That an American university senior thinks that it is appropriate to fire a faculty member for making an argument that he doesn’t like is what is truly appalling here. Kevin Casimer epitomizes the failure of the system of liberal education.

I suspect you don’t spend much time with American university students. :) They think a lot of ridiculous things, esp the younger ones. (Cue “kids today” music.) It’s part of their charm, though.

Kudos to Purdue for doing what is right vis a vis the librarian’s speech rights.

2 to 1 odds something will happen in one year. Most likely one of Chapman’s papers will be found to have the wrong citation, a panel will be pulled together from both gay studies and the adminstration, and he will be be stripped of tenure.

But every one else should call him out for being a bigot.

Free speech doesn’t mean you have to like the person.

I want Fred Phelps to have the right to spew his vile hatemongering religion. The antidote to bad speech is more speech. Phelps is a jerk. See how easy that is?

second history: Academic freedom is wildly overrated.Frankly, it interferes with the proper management of the university and has very little to do with education.It should be abolished and universities should be allowed to remove professors without cause.This would instill much needed discipline on the university campus.

Yeah, nothing quite like Liberty University-esque thought reform for everyone! Sign me up, immediately!

American university students think a lot of things that would make your hair curl. And when you get to American teenagers, watch out!

Which, when you think about it, is exactly how those inclined to be anti-black or anti-Semitic, or anti-women, currently act. Somehow, I think we can all live with the EEO policies that have been implemented.

second history: Academic freedom is wildly overrated.Frankly, it interferes with the proper management of the university and has very little to do with education.It should be abolished and universities should be allowed to remove professors without cause.This would instill much needed discipline on the university campus.

Um, wow. Universities don’t only exist for education, they also exist to do research, formulate and test theories, and create new knowledge for humankind to share. Restricting academic freedom interferes with these purposes. Lower tier schools might have an exclusive focus on undergraduate education, but not the top universities. Most scientific progress takes place at universities.

Ditto for the cost of heart disease research and fat people, lung cancer research and smokers, colon cancer research and people who eat fast food etc.

Guy:
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe that increased public acceptance of homosexuals would lead to fewer Larry Craigs hanging out in airport restroom stalls.

Richard Aubrey: For individually underwritten health, life, and disability income, weight, smoking, hazardous hobbies or jobs, and in some cases, parental and sibling health history are factors.
Already factored in.
Before AIDS, one company was unlikely to insure gays because of what the company considered their disorganized lifestyle. It made the prospect of keeping up the premiums kind of shaky, and most companies claim they need seven years’ premiums to break even.There were other issues affecting presumed persistency which could cause a downcheck, too, but the one regarding gays had nothing to do with disease.
As to smoking, it’s one of the most economically useful actions people can take.They die early, before they get really expensive, they don’t draw on pensions or Social Security for as long, if at all.Kind of interesting to see somebody trying to do “the numbers” against smoking, only to find out that doing all the numbers leads to the opposite conclusion.

If the economy stays as bad as it is for a few more years, the states may indeed start encouraging smoking as a revenue raiser and as an expense cutting measure.

Cause the right is nothing like Islamonazis. Unlike certain commie Presidents I could mention!

It’s like the islamists at the UN saying they want to ‘protect religion’ – as long as it’s Islam. All their actions and laws against Christians and Jews, etc, are ‘OK’, though.

It probably would lead to fewer Larry Craig’s; the folks who have sex in public bathroom stalls tend to be closeted. A better question I think is would “gay marriage” lead to fewer bathouses? And I thinnk the answer is yes.

FantasiaWHT: “Also, I fail to see how forcing gays into furtive lifestyles of fleeting partnerships would anyway mitigate the scourge of HIV in their communities.”Wait, so the gays are arguing that if we don’t let them marry, they’re going to show us by giving up their committed relationships?

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe that increased public acceptance of homosexuals would lead to fewer Larry Craigs hanging out in airport restroom stalls.

“Disorganized”? LOL! Most (not all) gays I know are meticulously neat and have the best lawns too.

Wait, so the gays are arguing that if we don’t let them marry, they’re going to show us by giving up their committed relationships?

The only thing that could possibly be agreed to by persons inclined to anti-gay biases is that they should shroud their biases more carefully. Instead of vague general feelings and discussions that they are uncomfortable with some elements of the gay agenda, they will have to act more covert and more directly. Always find myriad other reasons to not hire, fire, not rent, or otherwise inconvenience those suspected of being gay. If I can only smile and say warm fuzzy things about gays, then so be it; but in covert mode gays will be more directly damaged, but in ways difficult to impossible to prove.

Randy: but smokers and fatties are responsible the bulk of our health care costs.

Sorry Randy but at least the smoker part is not correct. On a life cycle basis, most of our medical spending is on old people. At least two studies have shown that smoking actually reduces costs because smokers tend not to live long enough to get those chronic, expensive diseases. Something like half the people over age 85 have Alzheimer’s disease.

You might have a better case on obesity since the effects take a long time to show up. Moreover, overweight is really at BMI 22. Why 22? That an empirical result. The disease incidence curves flatten out at 22.

ShelbyC:
Well, it’s kinda hard to just not accept such a huge chunk of the population,

Ah, but you forget. Since it’s already established that not accepting gays will make them cease to exist, we just need to stop accepting heterosexuals and they’ll eventually go away too.

Guy: Actually it’s an argument against public acceptance of heterosexuals, legally mandated lesbianism! I guess we can let men off the hook as long as they promise to only eat out their wives/girlfriends.

Well, it’s kinda hard to just not accept such a huge chunk of the population, but if you’re going to factor personal habits into public acceptance, the food chain for sexual proclivities needs to go:

1 gay women
2 straight women
3 straight men
4 gay men.

Sorry folks, nothing personal, it’s all about the costs.

Private universities (even ones that get substantial government funding) are not bound by the First Amendment, but only by professional academic freedom principles and by contractual obligations under its tenure contracts (and other employment contracts).

They should be. This is a golden opportunity the Republicans missed when they controlled all three branches of government. Academia is one of the strongholds of the left, and they use speech codes and other devices to stifle debate. They know very well how they got control in the 1960s and they are not about to let the other side do the same thing to them. Of course forcing free speech at private and public universities would not transform them overnight. But I can’t see how it would hurt. Most people are unaware of what’s going on with speech codes, and the Republicans should have used their power to expose the intolerance we find on many campuses.

Randy: Shelby: “therefore if we’re going to base our acceptance of our fellow citizens on the health care costs of their personal habits, it should factor into the debate.”I hear you bro!That’s why I’m starting a campaign to prohibit marriage rights to any smoker and to anyone who is obese.Not only do I find obese people disgusting, they violate one of the 7 Deadly Sins (thereby giving my bias some religious support), but smokers and fatties are responsible the bulk of our health care costs. From now on — you tip the scale, you end up in divorce court.No appeal, no excuses.So get rid of the fatties and the smokers, and make room for your lesbian neighbors!That’s because it is long been proven that lesbians have the lowest rate of AIDS or HIV of *any* group in America.Not only will your health care costs go way down, but they will fix anything in your house.

Unfortunately you are behind the parity curve. Since obesity and smoking are not lefty approved activities, the push is already on to ban the latter and charge more for health care to both.

Reference: http://www.slate.com/id/2233119/

Randy: I hear you bro! That’s why I’m starting a campaign to prohibit marriage rights to any smoker and to anyone who is obese. Not only do I find obese people disgusting, they violate one of the 7 Deadly Sins (thereby giving my bias some religious support), but smokers and fatties are responsible the bulk of our health care costs.

Hold the phone there chief. It sounds like you’re arguing we should nail the fatties and the smokers because they have greater costs than the gays. Sounds like you’ve already factored such costs into the debate.