Discrimination to protest discrimination?

Members of the American Philosophical Association have petitioned the organization to punish religious colleges or universities that require their students to abide by ethical standards that include the prohibition of engaging in homosexual acts. So far the petition has gathered over 1000 signatures, mostly people from academia.

The petitioners believe that religious institutions should not be able to act on their moral beliefs. The idea that “you can have your beliefs, you just can’t live by them” is tyranny in the guise of “enlightenment.”

Religious discrimination is now officially en vogue in academia. Not that it hasn’t been for a while now, they are just more brazen about it.

(hat tip: Francis Beckwith)

Another book club selection

In November 2007, Keith Sampson who is a maintanence man and student at Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis was reading a book during his break. A coworker who was black said she was offended by the book.

Sampson’s shop steward later told him the book was like bringing pornography to work. The university’s Affirmative Action Office “investigated” Sampson and wrote him a letter saying that he “demonstrated disdain and insensitivity to [his] coworkers” and ordered him not to read the book in their presence.

So what is this racially offensive book that is so inflammatory as to be considered contraband at an institution of “higher” learning? Well that would be Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan by Todd Tucker.

The problem that IUPUI has is that the book is not advocating support of the KKK. It describes events that occured in May 1924 where Notre Dame students got into a street fight with the KKK. Apparently IUPUI doesn’t understand that the KKK is religiously biggotted as well as racially biggotted. And that a book that documents a defeat of the KKK is not a book advocating KKK positions. Idiots.

So with great enthusiasm I have selected my next pick for Jason’s Super-Fantastic Bookclub!TM. Go pick up Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan and read it. You’ll be a rebel because it turns out that it is a banned book by at least one university.

I just searched IUPUI’s library catalog. Tucker’s book is part of the university collection. Currently it is checked out until 3/31/08. Makes me worry for that patron. He or she may be next in line for a harrassment investigation.

Stupid tolerance

A school in Pennsylvania is threatening to suspend a student for giving some chewing gum to a classmate.

Your probably thinking that this isn’t the 1950’s. Gum sharing isn’t that big a deal nowdays. You’re right, unless it violates the zero tolerance policy on drugs. You see the gum that the student was sharing was Jolt gum and contains the “stimulant” caffeine! AAAAGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!

The question is, why do we let “educators” teach children when they demonstrate they have no ability to use reason?

(hat tip: Nobody’s Business via Overlawyered)

Scott Savage: “threat to society”

OSU-Mansfield is investigating referrence librarian Scott Savage for sexual harrassment. The reason? He suggesting the book “The Marketing of Evil” for the freshman reading list. His accusers call the book homophobic and claim they now feel “threatened” on the campus because he suggested the book.

This is a case of the thought police on the loose. They don’t like the way Mr. Savage thinks so they have falsely accused him of sexual harrassment.

I did a quick search and discovered the book is not even available through the university library.

But is available through OSU-M’s online bookstore.

So wouldn’t that indicate that the bookstore employees are more “threatening” than Mr. Savage?

Anyway, once again it is liberals who show they are the ones who stifle freedom of speach. There are none so intolerant as the “tolerant”.

More ‘not news’ of the day

Reuters Headline:High caffeine levels found in energy drinks

Energy drinks that promise to boost performance and rev up metabolism can contain three to four times as much caffeine as a typical soda, a new study shows.

As Honeybun said, “well duh, they just figured this out?”

I just can’t beleive they wasted money on a study for this.

Academic thought

Academics are frequently criticized for not having real-world knowledge. That is, they know all the theories and advise people on how they should run businesses or create policies, but have no real experience on what the consequences of implementing a policy would be.

Which brings me to the point. Last night I started the summer semester in a class on organizational communication. One of the authors, Eric M. Eisenberg, is a communications professor whose father was also a communications professor. In the About the Authors section, he noted a weakness in his experience:

Having been raised in a household with no links to corporate America, Eisenberg was intrigued by the possibility of learning about the “real world” of organizational communication.

Sounds like he realized he needed “real world” experience. He must have gone out into the corporate world and worked for large and small companies to develop first hand knowledge.
That sounds like a reasonable move. But Eisenberg decided the best way to get “real world” experience was to….go back to school!

Determined to become fluent in both management and communication, and under the expert guidance of Dr. Peter Monge, he immersed himself in management theory and practice, publishing work on organizational communication networks and superior-subordinate communications. Eisenberg received his doctorate in Communications from Michigan State university in 1982.

Eisenberg illustrates the logical flaw in academic thinking. The best way to get “real world” experience is self-evidently not to remove yourself from the real world. Yet for academics, it is the preferred method.

Hate crime or hoax?

Someone has anonymously posted fliers around Southern Oregon University calling for the killing of homosexuals. School officials are “shocked”. No one has claimed responsibility for the fliers. The creator(s) remain unknown.

In response to the publicity, SOU President Elisabeth Zinser has proposed a 10-point plan to combat hate-crimes. In doing so, Ms. Zinser is ignoring recent history – faking hate crimes. Michelle Malkin has been documenting this trend.

Before SOU goes on a homophobia witch-hunt, how about making sure the fliers aren’t bogus.

CU problem

The Univesity of Colorado doesn’t need another scandal. It has one though. The chairman of the ethnic studies department, Ward Churchill, called the victims of 9/11 “little Eichmann’s”, the architect of the Nazi mass murders. His essay is one big anti-American tirade. What isn’t in the news is that he also refers to U.S. troops in the first Gulf War as nazi’s. “It was a performance worthy of the nazis during the early months of their drive into Russia.” Churchill was forced to resign his chairmanship. Colorado Governor Bill Owens says that isn’t enough. He wants Churchill fired.

What is it with Churchill that he feels the need to label people who love and fight for freedom as Nazis? The people who died in the attacks are more evil than the killers (who he calls “combat teams” instead of terrorists). What I find most amazing is that Churchill only holds a Masters Degree. Usually you have to hold a Ph.D. to reach that level of moral idiocy. He apparently has done it through self-study.

Should he be fired? Yes. I think it was Governor Bill Owens who said Churchill has the right to free speech, but we don’t need to pay him to say it. I think the University can fire him for cause. Free speech doesn’t cover slander. Equating those who died in the 9/11 attacks with nazis is blatantly a slander on the victims of terrorists.

Then yesterday when the CU regents were meeting to discuss Churchill’s employment, about 100 of his supports showed up to the meeting and caused a disruption. Two had to be arrested.

Governor Owens released a brilliant statement. He turned the speech of the leftists back on themselves:

“I appreciate the fact that the C.U. Regents have taken the necessary first step in the formal evaluation of Ward Churchill’s employment status. However, I deplore the behavior displayed by some students at the Regents’ meeting. Their abhorrent behavior underscores the culture of violence that can be spawned by inflammatory speeches and essays, such as those by Mr. Churchill.”

“Culture of violence.” That is great. I hope the students are proud of themselves. Their respect for Churchill is as respectable as their actions yesterday. That is to say, not at all.

Diversity failure is triumph

Last night, my technical writing class was discussing proposal writing. For an example, we reviewed an actual grant proposal submitted by the University of Colorado at Denver (UCD) in response to an RFP (request for proposal) seeking to fund new educational programs. UCD hopes to receive funding to offer a new certificate related to M.S. program I’m in.

One of the requirements of the funding organization was for the proposed program to involve women and minorities as part of a diversity initiative.

In their proposal the university sited a “diversity” statistic. Eighty percent of the graduates of UCD’s technical communication program are women. That’s 80%.

Remember back when there was a diversity failure if less than 50% of graduates were women? Now that it’s 80%, that is advertised as a success. It seems more like a failure from my position. Overall, college enrollment is approaching 60% women. This hurts women as well as men.

How? Well, this is why well educated women are having problems finding dates. It’s a fact, men are more likely to date women with less education than women are to date men with less education. That leads to a lot of single well educated women.

Back to the subject. Let’s face it. “Diversity” doesn’t really mean diversity. It means giving advantages to certain politically favored groups. Christna Hoff Sommers covers more about this in her book The War Against Boys.

From the “well duh” files

My uncle forwarded a news article to me.

It has a good point that there needs to be more study on how a patient’s gender can effect diseases.

Still, the article manages to make one person look pretty stupid.

“Women are different than men, not only psychologically (but) physiologically, and I think we need to understand those differences,” says Dr. Catherine DeAngelis, editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Women are different physiologically. This is a new conclusion? I figured that out for myself at a pretty young age without any medical training. In light of this evidence, it turns out I was a prodigy and should have trained in the medical field. I mean if I knew that men and women were different when I was 4 years old and medicine is only discovering that fact now, I should have been able to cure cancer by the time I was 25.