Headlines

AP

Longtime university official placed on leave for supporting referendum on new gay marriage law

Statement from Gallaudet University President T. Alan Hurwitz:

“I want to inform the community that I have placed Dr. Angela McCaskill on paid administrative leave effective immediately. It recently came to my attention that Dr. McCaskill has participated in a legislative initiative that some feel is inappropriate for an individual serving as Chief Diversity Officer; however, other individuals feel differently. I will use the extended time while she is on administrative leave to determine the appropriate next steps taking into consideration the duties of this position at the university. In the meantime an interim Chief Diversity Officer will be announced in the near future.”

Read the Article

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I’m burning all of my Bison clothing in a bon fire tonight!!!!!!

mattshu on October 10, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Destroyed.

hawkdriver on October 10, 2012 at 11:38 PM

Freedom of speech, as long as it is deemed appropriate. You drones may return to your cubicles now, go play with your iPhones…

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on October 10, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Chilling. Punished for expressing her opinion…this feels less and less like America.

changer1701 on October 10, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Free speech only if it is the fascist liberal agenda.

John the Libertarian on October 10, 2012 at 11:42 PM

Good thing she didn’t produce an anti-islam movie.

lorien1973 on October 10, 2012 at 11:42 PM

In other words, if you are against gay marriage, shut up! Or else! And we think that if it were to become law of the land, then everyone will be happy right? Wrong! They’ll come after your freedom next.

Christian Conservative on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

It’s a private university. Free speech has nothing to do with it. I doubt anyone here would be complaining if this was Liberty University firing a spokesman for supporting gay marriage instead.

Armin Tamzarian on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Chief Diversity Officer

LMFAO!

tom daschle concerned on October 10, 2012 at 11:44 PM

It’s a private university. Free speech has nothing to do with it. I doubt anyone here would be complaining if this was Liberty University firing a spokesman for supporting gay marriage instead.

Armin Tamzarian on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

puff puff pass Principal skinner.

tom daschle concerned on October 10, 2012 at 11:45 PM

In the meantime an interim Chief Diversity Officer will be announced in the near future.

Why? Just because you have to find something to spend all that student loan money on?

malclave on October 10, 2012 at 11:47 PM

They hate thought.

blatantblue on October 10, 2012 at 11:48 PM

She signed a petition to put a referendum on the ballot. I thought everyone was all for people “having a voice” by voting on issues.
Where does it say she supports or opposes gay marriage?

single stack on October 10, 2012 at 11:51 PM

Alas, if only she’d burned a flag, instead.

Knott Buyinit on October 10, 2012 at 11:52 PM

Armin Tamzarian on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Liberty University is a private Christian college. I assume they have some sort of statement of belief their instructors are supposed to be in agreement with.

Gallaudet University is a federally chartered university for the education of the deaf and hard of hearing located in Washington, D.C.

INC on October 10, 2012 at 11:55 PM

You are either a member of the Party, or you are no one. I remember when liberals used to rail about freedom. Now they crush dissent.

Bulletchaser on October 11, 2012 at 12:00 AM

The university acknowledges that it “is a congressionally created corporation that serves governmental objectives.” The university and the Department of Education explain that Gallaudet has been structured by the Federal Government to take the form of a “federally chartered, private, non-profit educational institution.” The federal government plays various roles within the institution

The fell hand of progressives imposing their agenda.

INC on October 11, 2012 at 12:01 AM

It’s a private university. Free speech has nothing to do with it. I doubt anyone here would be complaining if this was Liberty University firing a spokesman for supporting gay marriage instead.

Armin Tamzarian on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

On the other hand, from Wikipedia (footnotes omitted, emphasis added)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallaudet_University

Congressional charter

The university acknowledges that it “is a congressionally created corporation that serves governmental objectives.” The university and the Department of Education explain that Gallaudet has been structured by the Federal Government to take the form of a “federally chartered, private, non-profit educational institution.” The federal government plays various roles within the institution:[

Congress incorporated the Columbia Institution in 1857, significantly amended its charter in 1954 and authorizing permanent congressional appropriations. In 1986, Congress passed the Education of the Deaf Act and amended it in 1992. These Congressional acts are part of “the supreme law of Gallaudet University.”
Gallaudet must obtain authorization from the Secretary of the US Department of Education in order to sell or transfer title of any of its real property

The diplomas of all Gallaudet graduates are signed by the current U.S. President.

Three members of Congress are appointed to the university’s Board of Trustees as “Public Members.”

Gallaudet must provide annual reports to the Secretary of Education.

“Gallaudet receives the bulk of its income in the form of an annual appropriation from Congress, and the Department of Education oversees the University’s appropriation for the Federal government.”

Gallaudet University (and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf) are authorized to make purchases through the General Services Administration.

Gallaudet’s Fifty-Fifth Annual Report contains an appendix that includes the text of 99 Federal Acts related to Gallaudet/Columbia which were enacted between 1857 and 1912.

Ira on October 11, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Let’s see … diversity: African Americans – check. Females – check. Gays – check. Latinos – check. Marxists – check. Communists – check. Muslims – check. Conservatives? Heck no!

Christian Conservative on October 11, 2012 at 12:05 AM

They’ll come after your freedom next.

Christian Conservative on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Ask Elaine Huguenin, and she’ll tell you they already have.

Rebar on October 11, 2012 at 12:14 AM

More projection from liberals. They can’t imagine a conservative adhering to the rules of impartiality required for their employment when it contradicts their personal political position because it’s impossible for liberals to separate the two themselves.

Socratease on October 11, 2012 at 12:15 AM

the diversity officer was punished for… having an opinion that was diverse from others in the university? ironic.

In other words, if you are against gay marriage, shut up! Or else! And we think that if it were to become law of the land, then everyone will be happy right? Wrong! They’ll come after your freedom next.

Christian Conservative on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

exactly. this is one reason that i don’t want the definition of marriage changed (thankfully, in NC we got the amendment that protects marriage): if it’s changed, that means that everyone who happens to disagree with that new definition can be punished, and there are many different situations that can happen in. only one opinion is allowed, and everyone else must be silent or face punishment. although as we can see here, it’s already happening now. but imagine if the definition were changed as a federal law, all over the country. this kind of thing would happen a lot more. and of course, the msm wouldn’t spend much time caring about it.

Sachiko on October 11, 2012 at 12:18 AM

Looked at the article. Even gay marriage supporters in Maryland disagree with Gallaudet’s decision.

22044 on October 11, 2012 at 12:20 AM

I don’t think it would have been an issue if she were not the “diversity” officer for the school.

Kaptain Amerika on October 11, 2012 at 12:55 AM

If there’s one thing the University will not stand for, it’s intolerance!!

(If you don’t see the sarcasm in the above, neither would the people who suspended this woman….)

There Goes The Neighborhood on October 11, 2012 at 12:55 AM

Looked at the article. Even gay marriage supporters in Maryland disagree with Gallaudet’s decision.

22044 on October 11, 2012 at 12:20 AM

Actually, the bigot group in question tried to get her fired.

They are backpedaling because they realize that this, like Chick-Fil-A, is going to blow up in their face big time.

northdallasthirty on October 11, 2012 at 1:10 AM

George Orwell was unavailable for comment.

BuckeyeSam on October 11, 2012 at 2:06 AM

Ah yes… the true meaning of pro-choice comes to mind.

Only their approved choices matter… everything else is without merit, or consideration.

CPT. Charles on October 11, 2012 at 2:34 AM

Funny thing is, you don’t have to be against gay marriage to be in favor of a referendum on the law. I think the matter has enough social impact that it should be decided by referendum.

For the record, I think gay marriage is a misnomer, but I voted against the Texas ban on gay marriage.

Random Numbers (Brian Epps) on October 11, 2012 at 6:11 AM

Chief Diversity Officer

LOL wut?

ted c on October 11, 2012 at 6:34 AM

In fact, the inability to tell that you’re a bigot is exactly the kind of ignorance that propels the bigotry.
 
lostmotherland on May 14, 2012 at 3:09 PM

rogerb on October 11, 2012 at 6:49 AM

Diversity in everything except opinion. Typical.

CantCureStupid on October 11, 2012 at 6:52 AM

Ira on October 11, 2012 at 12:01 AM

Unfortunately, there’s Supreme Court caselaw that says that government funding (even in excess of 90% of an institution’s entire budget) does not make an institution a state actor for purposes of constitutional analysis.
E.g., Rendell-Baker v. Kohn

blammm on October 11, 2012 at 7:16 AM

I don’t think it would have been an issue if she were not the “diversity” officer for the school.

Kaptain Amerika on October 11, 2012 at 12:55 AM

So everyone but the diversity officer is allowed an opinion?

Night Owl on October 11, 2012 at 7:54 AM

I don’t think the real issue here is that this person was suspended for opposing gay “marriage.”

I think the real issue here is that we’ve actually got universities having a position of “Chief Diversity Officer,” which is so patently ridiculous that it would be laughable, were the status of our society not so dire.

Shump on October 11, 2012 at 8:23 AM

Amusingly, I’m in the opposite camp in Ohio.

I oppose SSM (preferring Fred) but would sign a referrendum to get the question on the ballot again.

The_Livewire on October 11, 2012 at 8:26 AM

It’s a private university. Free speech has nothing to do with it. I doubt anyone here would be complaining if this was Liberty University firing a spokesman for supporting gay marriage instead.

Armin Tamzarian on October 10, 2012 at 11:43 PM

If it were a private university chartered by The Church of We Love Gay Marriage, I would agree. If faculty and staff signed a code of conduct that specifically prohibited political activism, I would agree. As these are not true, I don’t agree.

Sekhmet on October 11, 2012 at 8:34 AM

I will use the extended time while she is on administrative leave to determine the appropriate next steps taking into consideration the duties of this position at the university.

Translation: “I will wait until the dust settles before quietly sending her a termination notice”

tommyboy on October 11, 2012 at 8:43 AM

Where does it say she supports or opposes gay marriage?

single stack on October 10, 2012 at 11:51 PM

I’d say it’s pretty clear she opposes same-sex marriage. The Maryland legislature passed a law making gay marriage legal in the state. Opponents of gay marriage gathered enough signatures to put the issue on the November ballot to overturn the law. If she’s pro gay marriage, she’d have no reason to sign the petition, the law is already in place. I signed the petition in our church parking lot on the way in to mass.

Trafalgar on October 11, 2012 at 8:48 AM

Why doesn’t someone try this with a Muslim business?

Mimzey on October 11, 2012 at 9:26 AM

Unfortunately, there’s Supreme Court caselaw that says that government funding (even in excess of 90% of an institution’s entire budget) does not make an institution a state actor for purposes of constitutional analysis.
E.g., Rendell-Baker v. Kohn

blammm on October 11, 2012 at 7:16 AM

So that justifies an institution the ability to advocate segregationist policies…you know..separate but equal? Constitutional analysis is not a valid and binding factor?

Mimzey on October 11, 2012 at 9:32 AM

I’d say it’s pretty clear she opposes same-sex marriage.

Trafalgar on October 11, 2012 at 8:48 AM

And?
Most people do. Why the discrimination?

Mimzey on October 11, 2012 at 9:36 AM

So that justifies an institution the ability to advocate segregationist policies…you know..separate but equal? Constitutional analysis is not a valid and binding factor?

Mimzey on October 11, 2012 at 9:32 AM

A private institution can, and should, have the ability to make hiring and firing decisions based on any factors they consider relevant. And both the law and court decisions agree that unless you are discriminating based on a category that has been given specific protection under the law, you can do whatever you want. An institution can fire someone because they don’t like their hair color, the way they dress and, yes, even what political views they take.

And why shouldn’t they? They’re a private organization. The Bill of Rights does not apply to them anymore than the Bill of Rights can tell me who I can and can’t keep out of my house. And I find nowhere in the Constitution that gives the federal government the right to regulate the hiring and firing decisions of a private organization.

Shump on October 11, 2012 at 9:57 AM