MU CINO (Catholic in name only)?

[mu-rara]

Webster's defines homophobia as "irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals" (emphasis mine)

Non-rhetorical question:
Is denying a group of people a legal right based solely on their sexual orientation qualify as discrimination, or even irrational discrimination?

If so, I would think, then being against gay marriage does at least meet the dictionary definition of being homophobic.

I am a Catholic who is 100% for gay rights and believe that gay marriage be available to protect the civil freedoms that are available to all Americans.

Marquette is a Catholic university.  Many students grew up in an environment that held to traditional Catholic teaching.  The Catholic Church is way behind the curve on gay rights (as a lot of us know).

If professors want to teach respect for gay people, they need to teach it, not demand it.  I was a believer in traditional Catholic teaching until family members came out and basically taught me how to respect their rights.

[g0lden3agle]

Man, I thought this thread was a goner 4 pages ago... Such a thrilling return to form!

[rocket surgeon]

as i am sure many of you here on this board, myself included,  have long traditions here at marquette, i am really getting more and more disappointed with this administration specifically and higher education in general.  i thought liberalism, political correctness and all that goes with it had plateaued.  not gone away because that would be denying opposing views.  but, the activism and power to truth has really  bummed me out.  example-the ever expanding definition of harassment and people claiming to be offended by something.  it's like an intellectual game of whac-a-mole.     

[GGGG]

as i am sure many of you here on this board, myself included,  have long traditions here at marquette, i am really getting more and more disappointed with this administration specifically and higher education in general.  i thought liberalism, political correctness and all that goes with it had plateaued.  not gone away because that would be denying opposing views.  but, the activism and power to truth has really  bummed me out.  example-the ever expanding definition of harassment and people claiming to be offended by something.  it's like an intellectual game of whac-a-mole.     

So I guess you decided not to read the thread huh?

[MUfan12]

This is one of the best things I've seen written on the issue. Very fair take.

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2014/12/behaving-badly-at-marquette-university

[brandx]

as i am sure many of you here on this board, myself included,  have long traditions here at marquette, i am really getting more and more disappointed with this administration specifically and higher education in general.  i thought liberalism, political correctness and all that goes with it had plateaued.  not gone away because that would be denying opposing views.  but, the activism and power to truth has really  bummed me out.  example-the ever expanding definition of harassment and people claiming to be offended by something.  it's like an intellectual game of whac-a-mole.     

How many talking points can be crammed in one paragraph? The only big one you forgot was to blame the media.

[GGGG]

This is one of the best things I've seen written on the issue. Very fair take.

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2014/12/behaving-badly-at-marquette-university

Yeah I can go with most of that.  I still am not sure about the outlines of the harassment policy and what it entails however. 

[brandx]

Yeah I can go with most of that.  I still am not sure about the outlines of the harassment policy and what it entails however. 

John McAdams, the Marquette University associate professor whose public criticism of a teaching assistant ignited a firestorm, has not been suspended, the university clarified in a statement Thursday.

"He is under review. He has been relieved of his teaching duties and other faculty duties," the statement said. "His salary and benefits will continue during the course of the review." Asked to clarify what would constitute a suspension, spokesman Brian Dorrington said: "Our definition of suspension is without pay."

Dorrington said he could not comment on specifics of a personnel matter under review, but he responded to general questions about whether certain types of conduct could prompt a professor to be relieved of duties.

"Under faculty conduct rules, a professor cannot be relieved of teaching duties for voicing an opinion about whether a potentially controversial offensive subject should be allowed by a TA to be discussed in class. A professor also cannot be relieved of teaching duties for having a viewpoint contrary to the university's position on a moral issue," Dorrington responded.

"We want to emphasize that all of our graduate student teaching assistants are students first. As students, they are learning their craft and it is our expectation that they are mentored and supported by our faculty," Dorrington said. "The university has clearly outlined rules of conduct, specifically as they relate to the faculty-student relationship."

Under the General Conduct section of the Employee Handbook, Dorrington said, "the rules state that behaving in an overtly discourteous, abusive or disrespectful manner toward a student is considered a violation of accepted policy and practice. The handbook also states that employees are encouraged to call attention to concerns by discussing the matter with their immediate supervisor."


McAdams said in a blog post Tuesday that he wasn't given specifics for why he was relieved of his duties while under review, and that he has secured an attorney. "Whether Marquette officials really want to punish us for blogging, or whether they simply feel the need for a pro forma 'investigation' of charges someone has brought, we don't know. Either would be gross misconduct on the part of Marquette officials."

[mu03eng]

John McAdams, the Marquette University associate professor whose public criticism of a teaching assistant ignited a firestorm, has not been suspended, the university clarified in a statement Thursday.

"He is under review. He has been relieved of his teaching duties and other faculty duties," the statement said. "His salary and benefits will continue during the course of the review." Asked to clarify what would constitute a suspension, spokesman Brian Dorrington said: "Our definition of suspension is without pay."

Dorrington said he could not comment on specifics of a personnel matter under review, but he responded to general questions about whether certain types of conduct could prompt a professor to be relieved of duties.

"Under faculty conduct rules, a professor cannot be relieved of teaching duties for voicing an opinion about whether a potentially controversial offensive subject should be allowed by a TA to be discussed in class. A professor also cannot be relieved of teaching duties for having a viewpoint contrary to the university's position on a moral issue," Dorrington responded.

"We want to emphasize that all of our graduate student teaching assistants are students first. As students, they are learning their craft and it is our expectation that they are mentored and supported by our faculty," Dorrington said. "The university has clearly outlined rules of conduct, specifically as they relate to the faculty-student relationship."

Under the General Conduct section of the Employee Handbook, Dorrington said, "the rules state that behaving in an overtly discourteous, abusive or disrespectful manner toward a student is considered a violation of accepted policy and practice. The handbook also states that employees are encouraged to call attention to concerns by discussing the matter with their immediate supervisor."


McAdams said in a blog post Tuesday that he wasn't given specifics for why he was relieved of his duties while under review, and that he has secured an attorney. "Whether Marquette officials really want to punish us for blogging, or whether they simply feel the need for a pro forma 'investigation' of charges someone has brought, we don't know. Either would be gross misconduct on the part of Marquette officials."

Ah so its a timeout, not a suspension.

Stupid clarification would have much rather they say nothing.  Whatever

[Eldon]

This is one of the best things I've seen written on the issue. Very fair take.

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2014/12/behaving-badly-at-marquette-university

Good article (though I somewhat kind of disagree on the free exchange of ideas part).  I especially like the point about calling out the student by name and potentially ruining her academic career.  I think he could have made his point without naming her explicitly.

Anyway, try to keep in mind MU's delicate position here.  MU cannot fire the PolSci prof because that would outrage conservative students, alums, and faculty (in addition to the hurdles involved since he is tenured).  However, MU also feels that it has to respond to the chorus of left-leaning students, alums, and faculty, who are calling for some action.

If MU can make it look like it is taking the issue seriously, while only administering a light slap on the wrist, hopefully they can appease both sides until this whole thing blows over.

I don't know if this is the strategy that the MU administration is actually following or even if it is the moral one, but if it is their strategy, I can understand their rationale.

Mods, while I would completely understand if you had locked this thread up seven posts in, I applaud you for letting it run its course.

[brandx]

I especially like the point about calling out the student by name and potentially ruining her academic career.  I think he could have made his point without naming her explicitly.

"We want to emphasize that all of our graduate student teaching assistants are students first. As students, they are learning their craft and it is our expectation that they are mentored and supported by our faculty," Dorrington said. "The university has clearly outlined rules of conduct, specifically as they relate to the faculty-student relationship."

Under the General Conduct section of the Employee Handbook, Dorrington said, "the rules state that behaving in an overtly discourteous, abusive or disrespectful manner toward a student is considered a violation of accepted policy and practice. The handbook also states that employees are encouraged to call attention to concerns by discussing the matter with their immediate supervisor."

This is the part that bothers me. Calling a student out publicly by name to, potentially, every person with access to a computer is a massive abuse of power.

He hit the trifecta as far as being discourteous, abusive and disrespectful to a student. A man with any dignity at all, would have gone to her supervisor to lodge a complaint if it was truly a matter where he felt a wrong had been committed.

[rocket surgeon]

this could get expen$ive...i mean really really expen$$$ive. 

[forgetful]

this could get expen$ive...i mean really really expen$$$ive. 

Not at all.  If he has a case (and I don't think he has a case at all) his maximum compensation based on precedent at other universities would be about 1.5 years salary.

[rocket surgeon]

Not at all.  If he has a case (and I don't think he has a case at all) his maximum compensation based on precedent at other universities would be about 1.5 years salary.

yes, that to, butlet's not forget about the crowd on the sidelines.  i'm pretty sure there are alumni on both side of this issue watching to see how marquette handles this.  it could make the difference between writing that check you have always been procrastinanting.  or having a good year and feeling benevolent and then...wondering what direction marquette chooses to go. 

[willie warrior]

I would counter that age and experience is irrelevant. Lt William Calley didn't get a pass on My Lai because he was 24 years old. He was rightfully convicted because he was brutally incompetent and responsible for the crime. Unfortunately, in a deeply politically divided America, William Calley's were being given responsibility they would not otherwise have been entrusted with. While the system shared responsibility (that is another discussion) Calley was correctly held accountable.

If Cheryl Abbate is given authority she must also accept the attendant responsibility. The absence of which is defined as tyranny.

Keefe, c'mon. In today's world, very few people in authority are expected to accept responsibility, unless they are not politically correct. Then the thought police use it against them.

[muwarrior69]

McAdams was on Fox News this morning.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/3952209069001/marquette-university-professor-suspended-over-blog/?#sp=show-clips

[mu03eng]

yes, that to, butlet's not forget about the crowd on the sidelines.  i'm pretty sure there are alumni on both side of this issue watching to see how marquette handles this.  it could make the difference between writing that check you have always been procrastinanting.  or having a good year and feeling benevolent and then...wondering what direction marquette chooses to go. 

Which is why Marquette should have gotten ahead of it and continues to demonstrate it has no idea how to handle these situations given that they released a statement to clarify that McAdams wasn't, ya know, suspended suspended.....he's just paid to not do anything while they review what happened......

No reason to make that statement, now it's just created more fodder for the newspaper to report....OHHHHH prof is suspended but he's not suspended but he says he's suspended, must be a conspiracy lets keep reporting!!!!  MU was sloppy getting to this point and has now exacerbated the issue.  Hopefully they figure it out because I'd rather not have a "scandal" as stupid as this 9 months into Lovell's presidency and dampen all the enthusiasm that has created.

[mu_hilltopper]

Mods, while I would completely understand if you had locked this thread up seven posts in, I applaud you for letting it run its course.

[rocket surgeon]

Which is why Marquette should have gotten ahead of it and continues to demonstrate it has no idea how to handle these situations given that they released a statement to clarify that McAdams wasn't, ya know, suspended suspended.....he's just paid to not do anything while they review what happened......

No reason to make that statement, now it's just created more fodder for the newspaper to report....OHHHHH prof is suspended but he's not suspended but he says he's suspended, must be a conspiracy lets keep reporting!!!!  MU was sloppy getting to this point and has now exacerbated the issue.  Hopefully they figure it out because I'd rather not have a "scandal" as stupid as this 9 months into Lovell's presidency and dampen all the enthusiasm that has created.

well said...depends on what "is" is...lots of legalese and legal posturing, and it really didn't have to get to this point.  waiting for the adults to enter the room and mediate this.  a good start would be to clarify some of the wording that trys to describe harassment-that is a cluster-fluck of what?  as i said previously=intellectual whac-a-mole with no winners.  Go Warriors!  nothing a good basketball season couldn't clear up and put this aside, at least for awhile  

[GGGG]

Which is why Marquette should have gotten ahead of it and continues to demonstrate it has no idea how to handle these situations given that they released a statement to clarify that McAdams wasn't, ya know, suspended suspended.....he's just paid to not do anything while they review what happened......

No reason to make that statement, now it's just created more fodder for the newspaper to report....OHHHHH prof is suspended but he's not suspended but he says he's suspended, must be a conspiracy lets keep reporting!!!!  MU was sloppy getting to this point and has now exacerbated the issue.  Hopefully they figure it out because I'd rather not have a "scandal" as stupid as this 9 months into Lovell's presidency and dampen all the enthusiasm that has created.

Yeah I think Marquette should have let McAdams say what he said, and responded with "it's a personnel matter and therefore we cannot make a comment" or something like that, but still reinforced what brandx outlined above.

People need to get it out of their heads that he is being investigated for being a conservative.  He is being investigated for being a terrible colleague and an a$$.  If a liberal professor did the same thing to a conservative graduate student, I would hope Marquette takes the exact same course of action.

[GGGG]

yes, that to, butlet's not forget about the crowd on the sidelines.  i'm pretty sure there are alumni on both side of this issue watching to see how marquette handles this.  it could make the difference between writing that check you have always been procrastinanting.  or having a good year and feeling benevolent and then...wondering what direction marquette chooses to go. 

Not only that, but Marquette spent years on the AAUP blacklist after it tied tenure to its Jesuit priests remaining in the priesthood.  (Reaction to Maguire.)

It doesn't want to go down that road again by firing a tenured professor.

[mu03eng]

[GGGG]

McAdams was on Fox News this morning.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/3952209069001/marquette-university-professor-suspended-over-blog/?#sp=show-clips

What a crock.

First of all, the Fox host mislabels her as a "professor."  Second, McAdams calls her an "instructor," which is true but doesn't correct the initial mistake.  Third, the Fox guy said that the Catholic Church "runs" the University.  That isn't accurate.

Why I hate the media and its slanted views (on either side.)

[rocket surgeon]

What a crock.

First of all, the Fox host mislabels her as a "professor."  Second, McAdams calls her an "instructor," which is true but doesn't correct the initial mistake.  Third, the Fox guy said that the Catholic Church "runs" the University.  That isn't accurate.

Why I hate the media and its slanted views (on either side.)

i agree-with little pieces of fact sprinkled in with a perceived agenda doesn't bode well for anyone.  although i lean toward fox, they should have made this scoop thread required reading before going on the air with mcadams-that would have been more fair n balanced.  the last thing we need is a reputable outlet steering this thing to one side or the other.  it(the subject at hand) should define itself based on the "rest of the story" and the chips will fall where they should fall if everyone is honest   rather than guided by agendas, money and self interest and oh yeah, money?

[mu03eng]

i agree-with little pieces of fact sprinkled in with a perceived agenda doesn't bode well for anyone.  although i lean toward fox, they should have made this scoop thread required reading before going on the air with mcadams-that would have been more fair n balanced.  the last thing we need is a reputable outlet steering this thing to one side or the other.  it(the subject at hand) should define itself based on the "rest of the story" and the chips will fall where they should fall if everyone is honest  rather than guided by agendas, money and self interest and oh yeah, money?

And there in lies the problem....everyone is playing to a crowd these days

Having said that, while I don't defend the media lets not act like this isn't out of no where, I mean the term Yellow journalism is a thing and was created over a 100 years ago....they've been spinning for centuries.  I bet the very first reporter misreported the size of the wooly mammoth that was taken down on Tuesday to sell more tablets.