The Carleton story seems to be getting some legs in the blogosphere. This excerpt begins with a quote from Ottawa University law professor Martha Jackman….

That’ll put an end to the campus thugs that storm the campus stages of conservative speakers. That’ll stop the assaults, too. And it will put an end to shutting down campus organizations that are conservative or republican supporting.

Yes, this means that the wackjobs will also be allowed to speak on campus too. But that is to expected in the marketplace of ideas. When ever we confront the wackjob left in the agora, we always win. That’s why they try to silence our point of view.

I’ve always found it unfair that women can have abortions and I can’t.

RightWinged on December 7, 2006 at 4:37 PM

Yes… why is it that women have a “right” to destroy human life for no other reason than it is convenient, and men are not allowed to do the same?

…women’s equality rights…how is equality an issue *IF MEN CAN’T HAVE BABIES*? With whom are they being compared for equality? Females of other species? Do female oragutans have greater access to “family planning”? Do female tree frogs receive better “reproductive counselling”?

Yes! And another thing:

Since the mother, father and child-to-be are all involved and affected by the decision, assigning sole discretionary powers to one person (i.e. the mother) may or may not be the right decision, but it certainly isn’t “equal”. The irony that the pro-choice position is actually anti-”equality”, yet is being synonym-ized with “equality”, seems to be lost on these people.

I don’t think the people doing this really think these things out any more. Instead I suspect they just appropriate whatever words out of the English language they want to and assign them to themselves – words like like “equality”, “fairness”, “caring”, and so on – and end up using them to describe whatever position it is they happen to take.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE ) a group that I am nominally affiliated with, has released a report concerning the status of free speech on both public and private college campuses. The results are less than encouraging:…

I’ll make you a deal, though. I won’t suppress your desire to spew racial epithets, and you won’t complain when I send out a letter of recommendation which goes into minute detail about your colorful methods of expression….

“There are certain forms of speech we constrain because there are other competing interests we think are more important, and this is a case where it is not a radical position on the part of the student government to decide that between freedom of expression for anti-abortion groups and respect for reproductive autonomy and equality rights of women, we come down on the side of women’s equality rights.”

…*TRANSLATE* *LANGUAGE=ENGLISH*

“We protect the speech and protect the causes we *SUPPORT*, and those knuckle-dragging red-state mouth-breathers can go whistle up a drainpipe for all we care.”

…women’s equality rights…how is equality an issue *IF MEN CAN’T HAVE BABIES*? With whom are they being compared for equality? Females of other species? Do female oragutans have greater access to “family planning”? Do female tree frogs receive better “reproductive counselling”?

I’d bet that they don’t support the Second Amendment at all…whachu think?

The idea behind free speech is for one side and the other to duke it out *VERBALLY*, letting the best idea carry the day. If abortion advocates can’t back up their spiel, they lose. Simple.

Then again, *MOST IF NOT ALL* Leftist positions are logically as well as morally indefensible in the arena of ideas…so draconian speech codes make sense…if you’re a draconian Leftist, that is….

…and if you weren’t a draconian Leftist, but more of a pragmatic liberal, you’d be out in the business world exercising the braincells filled with all that good, tasty book-larnin’ your parents paid for, makin’ the big bucks. It’s just that simple.

Go to college, get an unmaketable degree, stay in college. It only costs you your First Amendment rights. Then again, if you’re ideologically “reliable”, it really didn’t cost you anything….

I realize the rules are a little different, but A person doen’t check their 1st Amendment rights at the door simply because they enter a private educational institution.

Looks like F.I.R.E. will have penty to do for the foreseeable future.

The headline is correct, but at least one of the schools mentioned in the pull quote (Furman University) is a private school. When combining public and private the percentage is 68.

Furman actually used to be a Southern Baptist school, but has since went liberal and broke away from their Christian roots, like so many other schools.

Misconceptions about Islam #3: Islam oppresses women

The stereotypical image of a Muslim woman portrayed in the media is that of a woman hidden behind a veil, voiceless, silent figure, and without any rights. Contrary to this stereotype, Muslims believe that women’s rights were revealed by Allah (God) in the seventh century by prophet of Islam Muhammad (peace be upon him-pubh). Below is an account of some of these rights…

Iowa State Daily invites you to help erase stereotypes here.

and respect for reproductive autonomy and equality rights of women, we come down on the side of women’s equality rights.”

Equal rights? Yes! Finally, my day has arrived! As a man, I’ve always found it unfair that women can have abortions and I can’t. Where was this post a couple weeks ago, after I had Thanksgiving Lunch and Dinner?!

I won’t call them pro-choice – with all the means we have of prevention, unless its a case of rape, they had already made their choice.

Ok… bring on the flamethrowers….

There are certain forms of speech we constrain because there are other competing interests we think are more important

Wow! Whether legal or not, what is amazing is that people are saying things like this without batting an eye or thinking twice. I’m beginning to believe that negative learning has become rampant at colleges – i.e. people get dumber with every year they spend on campus.

Rarely will you see it put as bluntly as that — freedom of expression versus “respect.” It’s a false choice in this case, besides.

It’s a false dichotomy. They’re basically morally equating being pro life to being worse than a neo nazi. I believe neo nazis freedom of speach is protected more so than pro lifers in this case. You’re either “respectful” (ie pro choice) or “too disgusting to be government funded”.

One thing that was always fun was seeing some pompous blowhard strut into my office and demand I print his letter, which 9 times out of 10 was chock full of typos. So we’d print them verbatim to demonstrate their idiocy for all to see.

You suppose Mark Fuhrman would be welcome at Furman?

between freedom of expression for anti-abortion groups and respect for reproductive autonomy and equality rights of women

quoted in entry

False dichotomy, beside which the real issue has nothing to do with either. Orwellian may be a stretch, but it does smack of canadian. Well, Ottawa does have 2 universities.