Group of MU professors proving yet again, that place represents me and what I always liked about it less and less every day.
http://www.jsonline.com/features/religion/marquette-faculty-members-rebuke-ryan-budget-2o5fj2f-152125365.html?ipad=y (http://www.jsonline.com/features/religion/marquette-faculty-members-rebuke-ryan-budget-2o5fj2f-152125365.html?ipad=y)
BTW, another fine example of unbiased, fact-based reporting by the JS...
His proposal would cut $300 billion in spending over the next decade, slashing such safety net programs for the poor as food stamps, Medicare and Medicaid.
First, I'm in before the lock, because there's no way this doesn't turn into a political pissing thread in about five responses.
Having said that, I actually took the time to read the article and found it reasonably balanced. The JS covered the story, and as part of that story mentioned only a third of profs actually signed the statement and presented a counter argument from someone that did not sign it. Marquette is mentioned only as allowing its professors to have academic freedom and not as sanctioning or supporting the statement.
You seem more upset that someone would critically question the use of Catholic faith in support of political objectives for the Republican party to which you are aligned. Perhaps you should consider whether the criticism raised by professors at two leading Catholic Universities has any serious merit.
At Marquette, I learned to think critically about different viewpoints, including those I don't agree with. But maybe that doesn't represent you and what you liked about it.
As stated above, I am going to be careful not to discuss the merits of the letter or the government policy. That said, the very first sentence of JS's coverage indicates that a total of 50 faculty signed. Marquette prides itself on academic freedom. I'd be careful not to paint with too broad a brush and ascribe the sentiments of those faculty members to an overall university position. For reference, I take you back to a very headed debate regarding the appointment of the Arts and Sciences Dean two years ago. There were strong feelings on both sides.
Just to correct myself, it was reported as 'more than 50'. And please note that the MU faculty count exceeds 700.
I'm also not going to delve into politics, but the JS piece seemed quite balanced and as others have noted less than a 1/3 of the faculty in those departments signed.
Count me as proud that they allow their faculty to speak freely and present diverse viewpoints on important issues.
Not feeling it, Naivin. A percentage of professors publicly disagreed with a budget proposal? Of course they did. Any budget proposed by anyone anywhere is going to have a percentage that disagree with it.
I guess the reason I don't have a problem with it is that it was based from a position of theology (which arguably has no basis as a foundational tenet of defending a budget plan anyway) not from politics. If this were professors simply beating a political drum in unison under the Marquette banner, that would be a major problem for me. But when politicians begin ascribing religious defenses to their political agendas, they deserve whatever they get and more.
I guess my point was more along the lines of a continued string/trend of opinions, decisions, actions, etc., that just makes MU look very little like the University I knew 20 years ago (Frankly, I think it extends to the Jesuits, Catholic Church, or at least people who purport to be Catholic). That may be more of a statement on society, and MU is simply following that trend, but I certainly don't have to like it.
I agree the facts as it relates to MU, etc. are presented pretty well, the comment on the JS piece itself was largely related to the specific line I pointed out. If anyone considers that objective language/writing, or a fair and balanced assessment of Ryan's complete proposal, may want to consider taking a closer look. The writer is either a terrible writer, or willfully providing a portion of the picture that supports her opinion on the matter.
Quote from: MUBurrow on May 20, 2012, 11:51:47 AM
. If this were professors simply beating a political drum in unison under the Marquette banner, that would be a major problem for me.
Let's get real though, that's exactly what they're doing (and I never said all of them, nor was it some sort of official MU statement), regardless of what they call it, or how they try to package it. Do they have a right to do it? You bet, and I support that right. However, it simply follows the trend of making Marquette less and less appealing to me. That's my point.
Over 75% of the Profs who signed it were outside the of Dept. of Theology, so you'll forgive me if i don't buy the argument that this is simply about the Catholic element, and not a public political argument/tactic. If this came from a group of Bishops, Cardinal Dolan, etc., that would be a different story, but let's call this what it is, a bunch of academics espousing their political point of view under the guise of Church tenant. They are free to do so, but it's simply not what I want to see coming out of MU.
Quote from: Warrior's Path on May 20, 2012, 11:14:25 AM
First, I'm in before the lock, because there's no way this doesn't turn into a political pissing thread in about five responses.
You forgot the gif, silly.
(http://beerlake.net/dump/tng-in-before-lock.gif)
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on May 20, 2012, 12:46:06 PM
I guess my point was more along the lines of a continued string/trend of opinions, decisions, actions, etc., that just makes MU look very little like the University I knew 20 years ago (Frankly, I think it extends to the Jesuits, Catholic Church, or at least people who purport to be Catholic). That may be more of a statement on society, and MU is simply following that trend, but I certainly don't have to like it.
I agree the facts as it relates to MU, etc. are presented pretty well, the comment on the JS piece itself was largely related to the specific line I pointed out. If anyone considers that objective language/writing, or a fair and balanced assessment of Ryan's complete proposal, may want to consider taking a closer look. The writer is either a terrible writer, or willfully providing a portion of the picture that supports her opinion on the matter.
maybe you need to do a little more research on your own.
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/05/ryans-budget-spin/
IBTL.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on May 20, 2012, 01:00:30 PM
Let's get real though, that's exactly what they're doing (and I never said all of them, nor was it some sort of official MU statement), regardless of what they call it, or how they try to package it. Do they have a right to do it? You bet, and I support that right. However, it simply follows the trend of making Marquette less and less appealing to me. That's my point.
Over 75% of the Profs who signed it were outside the of Dept. of Theology, so you'll forgive me if i don't buy the argument that this is simply about the Catholic element, and not a public political argument/tactic. If this came from a group of Bishops, Cardinal Dolan, etc., that would be a different story, but let's call this what it is, a bunch of academics espousing their political point of view under the guise of Church tenant. They are free to do so, but it's simply not what I want to see coming out of MU.
I'll definitely agree that I think the theologians defeat their own purpose by opening the signatories beyond the dept of theology.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on May 20, 2012, 12:46:06 PM
I guess my point was more along the lines of a continued string/trend of opinions, decisions, actions, etc., that just makes MU look very little like the University I knew 20 years ago (Frankly, I think it extends to the Jesuits, Catholic Church, or at least people who purport to be Catholic). That may be more of a statement on society, and MU is simply following that trend, but I certainly don't have to like it.
I agree the facts as it relates to MU, etc. are presented pretty well, the comment on the JS piece itself was largely related to the specific line I pointed out. If anyone considers that objective language/writing, or a fair and balanced assessment of Ryan's complete proposal, may want to consider taking a closer look. The writer is either a terrible writer, or willfully providing a portion of the picture that supports her opinion on the matter.
If you don't think a significant portion of MU's faculty tended toward liberal thinking 20 years ago, you weren't paying attention.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 20, 2012, 03:03:52 PM
If you don't think a significant portion of MU's faculty tended toward liberal thinking 20 years ago, you weren't paying attention.
I tend to agree with that, but further, if you didn't think a portion of MU's faculty tended toward liberal thinking .. and a portion leaned conservative, and some were in the middle .. you weren't paying attention.
When MU hires non-Jesuits, I don't believe MU has ever required a fealty oath prior to their employment. They are who they are, (hopefully) experts in their field who can inspire and impart their knowledge to a younger generation.
"The truth shall make you free." (Somebody or other said that.)
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on May 20, 2012, 03:43:25 PM
I tend to agree with that, but further, if you didn't think a portion of MU's faculty tended toward liberal thinking .. and a portion leaned conservative, and some were in the middle .. you weren't paying attention.
Oh yes...I completely agree. I just don't think that this letter presents any sort of evidence that the faculty has changed in any way.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on May 20, 2012, 02:12:12 PM
maybe you need to do a little more research on your own.
http://www.factcheck.org/2011/05/ryans-budget-spin/
IBTL.
Surprise, Surprise. Hards with a political opinion.....Thought you were against all political commentary on this board? Once again proving you only dislike political commentary that does not agree with your own.
So if I post in a thread solely to get in before the lock with no intention of contributing to the wet hairy kittenness of the thread does that make me a good user of the internets or a bad user of the internets?
Quote from: mu-rara on May 21, 2012, 09:55:23 AM
Surprise, Surprise. Hards with a political opinion.....Thought you were against all political commentary on this board? Once again proving you only dislike political commentary that does not agree with your own.
Just don't say Madison is a liberal town. That's unforgivable. :P
Quote from: mu-rara on May 21, 2012, 09:55:23 AM
Surprise, Surprise. Hards with a political opinion.....Thought you were against all political commentary on this board? Once again proving you only dislike political commentary that does not agree with your own.
Surprise surprise, I reported the thread to the mods the moment it went up.
And for what it is worth, I am only pointing out the facts of the argument. Nothing more. That website is incredibly balanced.
I look forward to reporting any other threads that venture into the political realm regardless of their ideology.
Quote from: MUfan12 on May 21, 2012, 10:08:50 AM
Just don't say Madison is a liberal town. That's unforgivable. :P
No, it is absolutely true.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on May 21, 2012, 02:57:50 PM
Surprise surprise, I reported the thread to the mods the moment it went up.
And for what it is worth, I am only pointing out the facts of the argument. Nothing more. That website is incredibly balanced.
I look forward to reporting any other threads that venture into the political realm regardless of their ideology.
OK, you're right. You report all political threads, but in cases where you disagree, you also attack the poster. My bad.
There is much disagreement as to Annenberg's balance in factcheck.org
This is only in danger of being locked because of the interpersonal squabbling, not politics. (yet).
Quote from: mu-rara on May 21, 2012, 03:14:46 PM
OK, you're right. You report all political threads, but in cases where you disagree, you also attack the poster. My bad.
There is much disagreement as to Annenberg's balance in factcheck.org
Yes, I am right. I do, but its safe to say that most of the threads that go off track here do so from a conservative comment, not a liberal one. If you don't believe me, go look.
Where am I attacking the poster?
Leonore Annenberg's (founder of the Annenberg foundation) husband worked for Nixon, and both of them made campaign contributions to Ronald Reagan. So yes, the foundation they started must have a strong liberal bias.
You make my head hurt.
I'm done here.
I believe the faculty of most universities would be at least 30% against any attempt to reform medicaid that doesn't include huge tax increases.
I think the attempts to avoid making what is obviously a political thread political are incredibly amusing (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-basic/popcorn.gif)
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on May 20, 2012, 03:43:25 PM
I tend to agree with that, but further, if you didn't think a portion of MU's faculty tended toward liberal thinking .. and a portion leaned conservative, and some were in the middle .. you weren't paying attention.
When MU hires non-Jesuits, I don't believe MU has ever required a fealty oath prior to their employment. They are who they are, (hopefully) experts in their field who can inspire and impart their knowledge to a younger generation.
I was actually working on a project of trying to see which MU professors signed the recall (iverifytherecall) for my own interests. Got to the political science section and couldn't find anyone. Turns out one of the socialist* poli sci profs was circulating recall petitions and one of the professors I like signed it and showed me the link to their signature. The second part of what hilltopper said is garbage... inspire and impart.. hahaha
My qualm isn't with the article 'rebuking Ryan's budget' "accusing him of distorting Catholic social teaching in its defense", yet they aren't part of the 43 institutions suing HHS over the Obamacare mandate (Notre Dame and the Archdiocese of NY is) of trying to distort Catholic teachings.
*this professor is an admitted socialist, not using it as an insult
Quote from: wildbillsb on May 20, 2012, 06:16:48 PM
"The truth shall make you free." (Somebody or other said that.)
Along the same lines from Mark Twain:
"When in doubt, do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest."
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on May 20, 2012, 01:00:30 PM
If this came from a group of Bishops, Cardinal Dolan, etc., that would be a different story, but let's call this what it is, a bunch of academics espousing their political point of view under the guise of Church tenant. They are free to do so, but it's simply not what I want to see coming out of MU.
If you're going to point out bad writing in the JS article, you might want to make sure you check your own first; the word you're looking for is "tenet" not "tenant" (actually, you're looking for "tenets," since there are more than one).
Quote from: jsglow on May 20, 2012, 11:32:11 AM
As stated above, I am going to be careful not to discuss the merits of the letter or the government policy. That said, the very first sentence of JS's coverage indicates that a total of 50 faculty signed. Marquette prides itself on academic freedom. I'd be careful not to paint with too broad a brush and ascribe the sentiments of those faculty members to an overall university position. For reference, I take you back to a very headed debate regarding the appointment of the Arts and Sciences Dean two years ago. There were strong feelings on both sides.
despite the "small" number of faculty ascribing to this letter, i would think marquette would want to weigh in. they still represent the university, right or wrong. to say paul ryan's budget proposal is "immoral" is quite heavy however. first off, if something is not done to right the ship, medicaid/medicare will cease to exist at all. it will be bk and no one will benefit-how moral would that be. secondly, where in the catholic doctrine does it say we are to support some of these slackers cradle to grave? that in and of itself would be immotal imho of course. now along the lines of morality, where are these sacrosanct faculty nmembers on the real moral issues facing us such as contraception and abortion and the feds mandating that catholic institutions pay for them despite being totally against our teachings. if there were any case for separation of church and state, it would be here and now.
Quote from: Ari Gold on May 22, 2012, 07:34:19 PM
I was actually working on a project of trying to see which MU professors signed the recall (iverifytherecall) for my own interests. Got to the political science section and couldn't find anyone. Turns out one of the socialist* poli sci profs was circulating recall petitions and one of the professors I like signed it and showed me the link to their signature. The second part of what hilltopper said is garbage... inspire and impart.. hahaha
Why is it garbage?
Quote from: wyzgy on May 24, 2012, 04:38:08 AM
despite the "small" number of faculty ascribing to this letter, i would think marquette would want to weigh in. they still represent the university, right or wrong. to say paul ryan's budget proposal is "immoral" is quite heavy however. first off, if something is not done to right the ship, medicaid/medicare will cease to exist at all. it will be bk and no one will benefit-how moral would that be. secondly, where in the catholic doctrine does it say we are to support some of these slackers cradle to grave? that in and of itself would be immotal imho of course. now along the lines of morality, where are these sacrosanct faculty nmembers on the real moral issues facing us such as contraception and abortion and the feds mandating that catholic institutions pay for them despite being totally against our teachings. if there were any case for separation of church and state, it would be here and now.
I would understand if MU decides to sue the feds over the health care mandate a la Notre Dame.
However, MU isn't (and shouldn't) rebuke its faculty members over a letter stating their opinions. They never did it with McAdams and the nickname issue. Universities have to let that stuff from its faculty slide.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 24, 2012, 08:48:19 AM
I would understand if MU decides to sue the feds over the health care mandate a la Notre Dame.
However, MU isn't (and shouldn't) rebuke its faculty members over a letter stating their opinions. They never did it with McAdams and the nickname issue. Universities have to let that stuff from its faculty slide.
It's because of the conspiracy that college professors goal in life is to produce welfare loving communists.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 24, 2012, 08:48:19 AM
However, MU isn't (and shouldn't) rebuke its faculty members over a letter stating their opinions. They never did it with McAdams and the nickname issue. Universities have to let that stuff from its faculty slide.
I'm not to familiar with the hiring process of univeristy professors, but I'd imagine if MU starts rebuking their professors they're going to have a much harder time getting quality teachers in there. Especially in Arts and Sciences. This day and age you absolutely have to allow your faculty to do this stuff.
Quote from: LAZER on May 24, 2012, 08:57:14 AM
I'm not to familiar with the hiring process of univeristy professors, but I'd imagine if MU starts rebuking their professors they're going to have a much harder time getting quality teachers in there. Especially in Arts and Sciences. This day and age you absolutely have to allow your faculty to do this stuff.
Yes. And while I think sometimes academics hide behind the "academic freedom" argument too often to support complete whack-job opinions, faculty members are not really employees in the traditional sense of the word...but Marquette isn't IBM either and shouldn't be treated that way.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 24, 2012, 09:01:20 AM
Yes. And while I think sometimes academics hide behind the "academic freedom" argument too often to support complete whack-job opinions, faculty members are not really employees in the traditional sense of the word...but Marquette isn't IBM either and shouldn't be treated that way.
i think i said "weigh in" i believe marquette as a private catholic institution should clarify it's own stance in order to give some relief to those of us who want to think that they still have some core standards from which they arose and got to where they are. i am not holding my breath however
Does MU have an official stance on the "Paul Ryan bill" to "weigh in" with? I doubt it...
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 24, 2012, 12:21:00 PM
Does MU have an official stance on the "Paul Ryan bill" to "weigh in" with? I doubt it...
why does this select group of "teachers" feel the need to come out using their affiliation with marquette to state a hypocritical opinion regarding the ethics of paul ryans budget. why can't they leave marquette out of it? i know why. they want the credibility of the mu name, therefore, marquette should have the ability to weigh in
Quote from: wyzgy on May 24, 2012, 12:45:01 PM
why does this select group of "teachers" feel the need to come out using their affiliation with marquette to state a hypocritical opinion regarding the ethics of paul ryans budget. why can't they leave marquette out of it? i know why. they want the credibility of the mu name, therefore, marquette should have the ability to weigh in
Marquette has the ability to weigh in. But the question I have is, what *is* Marquette's official stance on the Paul Ryan bill? I doubt it has one.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 24, 2012, 01:08:25 PM
Marquette has the ability to weigh in. But the question I have is, what *is* Marquette's official stance on the Paul Ryan bill? I doubt it has one.
you are probably right or they are just choosing not to weigh in which doesn't surprise me. if i had to guess...we would have to ask fr. pilarz directly seeing as how some of his employees have chosen to use their positions at marquette to try to show some type of "higher ground" or authority position. but if one of my employees used my company as a backdrop to a political position, i would object if it weren't in line with my own, i would disallow it altogether or i would clarify my own position and either distance myself or concur with it
Quote from: cj111 on May 23, 2012, 08:32:13 PM
If you're going to point out bad writing in the JS article, you might want to make sure you check your own first; the word you're looking for is "tenet" not "tenant" (actually, you're looking for "tenets," since there are more than one).
Thanks professor! Pointing out grammatical and spelling errors is always a great argument (particularly in the age of iPad's annoying autocorrections).
Quote from: wyzgy on May 24, 2012, 02:41:23 PM
you are probably right or they are just choosing not to weigh in which doesn't surprise me. if i had to guess...we would have to ask fr. pilarz directly seeing as how some of his employees have chosen to use their positions at marquette to try to show some type of "higher ground" or authority position. but if one of my employees used my company as a backdrop to a political position, i would object if it weren't in line with my own, i would disallow it altogether or i would clarify my own position and either distance myself or concur with it
Pretty much answered your own question. Academic Freedom provides protection against reprisal by a boss/owner/administrator/supervisor/whomever whose opinions and beliefs are contrary to those of the individual. I don't know about you, but I think that's something we should cherish and strive for in a university? That's the raison d'etre for having such a place, no? Truth shall make one free.
Quote from: wildbillsb on May 24, 2012, 04:10:22 PM
Pretty much answered your own question. Academic Freedom provides protection against reprisal by a boss/owner/administrator/supervisor/whomever whose opinions and beliefs are contrary to those of the individual. I don't know about you, but I think that's something we should cherish and strive for in a university? That's the raison d'etre for having such a place, no? Truth shall make one free.
who said anything about "reprisal"?? not once(nor multiple times) have i even inferred any retaliation or censorship of the teachers for their beliefs. and i love raisons
Quote from: wyzgy on May 24, 2012, 12:45:01 PM
why does this select group of "teachers" feel the need to come out using their affiliation with marquette to state a hypocritical opinion regarding the ethics of paul ryans budget. why can't they leave marquette out of it? i know why. they want the credibility of the mu name, therefore, marquette should have the ability to weigh in
who constitutes "marquette" in this situation?
Quote from: MUBurrow on May 24, 2012, 04:36:01 PM
who constitutes "marquette" in this situation?
dude-seriously? marquette, michigan. it depends on what "is" is, right?
Where is Joe McCarthy when you need him?
Quote from: wyzgy on May 24, 2012, 05:01:03 PM
dude-seriously? marquette, michigan. it depends on what "is" is, right?
i guess i'm asking who you think has the responsibility to speak for marquette on the issue? prez? does it require a majority vote of the board? even greater coalition of professors? point being that often times we want a soundbite to attribute to the alma mater for one reason or another, but its much tougher to pinpoint the people with the ability or responsibility to provide it.
Quote from: MUBurrow on May 25, 2012, 04:28:52 PM
i guess i'm asking who you think has the responsibility to speak for marquette on the issue? prez? does it require a majority vote of the board? even greater coalition of professors? point being that often times we want a soundbite to attribute to the alma mater for one reason or another, but its much tougher to pinpoint the people with the ability or responsibility to provide it.
Pilarz reps Marquette (as long as his views match mine). ;)
Quote from: MUBurrow on May 25, 2012, 04:28:52 PM
i guess i'm asking who you think has the responsibility to speak for marquette on the issue? prez? does it require a majority vote of the board? even greater coalition of professors? point being that often times we want a soundbite to attribute to the alma mater for one reason or another, but its much tougher to pinpoint the people with the ability or responsibility to provide it.
By and large, Marquette as an institution is going to remain neutral on all sorts of issues unless they deal with education-related issues or something that runs counter to Catholic theology. There is no reason for them to speak out on this specific issue because there is no need for them to make enemies.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on May 20, 2012, 01:00:30 PM
Let's get real though, that's exactly what they're doing (and I never said all of them, nor was it some sort of official MU statement), regardless of what they call it, or how they try to package it. Do they have a right to do it? You bet, and I support that right. However, it simply follows the trend of making Marquette less and less appealing to me. That's my point.
Over 75% of the Profs who signed it were outside the of Dept. of Theology, so you'll forgive me if i don't buy the argument that this is simply about the Catholic element, and not a public political argument/tactic. If this came from a group of Bishops, Cardinal Dolan, etc., that would be a different story, but let's call this what it is, a bunch of academics espousing their political point of view under the guise of Church tenant. They are free to do so, but it's simply not what I want to see coming out of MU.
When you say "If this came from a group of Bishops... that would be a different story", did you mean something like this?
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/222003-catholic-bishops-criticize-ryan-budget-cuts-to-food-stamps (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/222003-catholic-bishops-criticize-ryan-budget-cuts-to-food-stamps)
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/federal-budget/upload/Letter-to-Congress-Federal-Budget-2012-03-06.pdf (http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/federal-budget/upload/Letter-to-Congress-Federal-Budget-2012-03-06.pdf)
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 25, 2012, 08:24:22 PM
By and large, Marquette as an institution is going to remain neutral on all sorts of issues unless they deal with education-related issues or something that runs counter to Catholic theology. There is no reason for them to speak out on this specific issue because there is no need for them to make enemies.
fine, but what if this does relate to their education issues? do the teachers who signed this "protest letter" to paul ryans budget proposal teach to the issue? in other words, do the teachers espouse this kind of thinking in their respective classes? if so, i believe it to be flawed and contra to the catholic traditions of mu. what confuses me is their collective need to write a letter (legitimacy in numbers?) under the marquette name. i would hope, if in class, the counter point would be made that cradle to grave nannying and if nothing is to be done about present budget-no one will benefit-those issues would be brought as well.
I doubt many of the professors that signed the letter teach to those political points in their classrooms but if they do that is their right under academic freedom anyway.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on May 26, 2012, 07:39:03 AM
I doubt many of the professors that signed the letter teach to those political points in their classrooms but if they do that is their right under academic freedom anyway.
i understand it is their right, but if they are going to use marquette as a "qualifier" there is some responsibility to it-that's all. is it my employees "right" to write something using my company as cred that i may have a problem with? under freedom of speech? just b/c its a right doesn't mean it carries no possible implications. southie, you keep saying it's their "right"-nice, but does that give them the freedom to say anything they want?
The Catholic bishops, hardly a bastion of rampant liberalism, had the same concerns. If anything, this may be the rare occasion where members of the MU faculty are actually in line with the American bishops. Are you going to criticize the bishops for using their titles for cover?
Quote from: 2002MUalum on May 25, 2012, 05:09:02 PM
Pilarz reps Marquette (as long as his views match mine). ;)
This is the single most significant post in the thread. The argument only exists because people disagree with what the professors are saying, not because of how they're doing it. If they made the opposite point, their critics would be silent as the grave right now.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 26, 2012, 08:39:45 AM
This is the single most significant post in the thread. The argument only exists because people disagree with what the professors are saying, not because of how they're doing it. If they made the opposite point, their critics would be silent as the grave right now.
is that a fact?? i would like a little balance actually-maybe some consistency with the "opinion" calling someones ideas unethical b/c it doesn't fit their agenda.
Quote from: wyzgy on May 26, 2012, 07:50:53 AM
i understand it is their right, but if they are going to use marquette as a "qualifier" there is some responsibility to it-that's all. is it my employees "right" to write something using my company as cred that i may have a problem with? under freedom of speech? just b/c its a right doesn't mean it carries no possible implications. southie, you keep saying it's their "right"-nice, but does that give them the freedom to say anything they want?
Stop mixing this up with your workplace. It isn't the same thing. The faculty have the right to pretty much say whatever they want as long as it isn't threatening, etc. It is under the terms of the academic rules at Marquette.
http://www.marquette.edu/acad/rights_responsibilities.shtml
"The college or university teacher is a citizen, a member of a learned profession, and an officer of an educational institution. When he/she speaks or writes as a citizen, he/she should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but his/her special position in the civil community imposes special obligations. As a man/woman of learning and an educational officer, he/she should remember that the public may judge his/her profession and institution by his/her utterances. Hence, he/she should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that he/she is not an institutional spokesperson."
Note: I don't believe anyone thinks those faculty members are actually speaking *for* Marquette.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 26, 2012, 08:39:45 AM
This is the single most significant post in the thread. The argument only exists because people disagree with what the professors are saying, not because of how they're doing it. If they made the opposite point, their critics would be silent as the grave right now.
Exactly. That is why I brought up McAdams. People on this board have posted links to his blog and used adjectives like "awesome" to describe a position he takes that actually ridicules the university's position on an issue. The knife cuts both ways.
Loosely related (perhaps very loosely), and maybe a bit excessive, but I found this interesting, and agree with the position in principle, with the key comment being,
"Georgetown's Catholic identity was one of the many outstanding attributes that appealed to me," he said. "Unfortunately, I found that Georgetown today lacks the integrity to consistently live the Catholic identity it claims."
Sadly the same can be said about a whole lot of individuals as well, which is likely why situations like these come about.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/25/exorcist-author-to-sue-georgetown-after-sebelius-visit/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/25/exorcist-author-to-sue-georgetown-after-sebelius-visit/)
The saddest part is the moron author suing in a Vatican court. Give me a break. An education is about making individual decisions after considering all positions. If you don't like her stance on abortion? Debate her on it. Suing the University is small-minded.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on May 26, 2012, 10:46:24 AM
Loosely related (perhaps very loosely), and maybe a bit excessive, but I found this interesting, and agree with the position in principle, with the key comment being,
"Georgetown's Catholic identity was one of the many outstanding attributes that appealed to me," he said. "Unfortunately, I found that Georgetown today lacks the integrity to consistently live the Catholic identity it claims."
Sadly the same can be said about a whole lot of individuals as well, which is likely why situations like these come about.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/25/exorcist-author-to-sue-georgetown-after-sebelius-visit/ (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/25/exorcist-author-to-sue-georgetown-after-sebelius-visit/)
This might be off topic, but is this one of the "You can't go home again" type of things that we all go through when we get older?
Every organization (including the Catholic Church and specifically it's academic institutions) are a living group of ideas that are going to evolve over time. I'm not saying every evolution is correct, or even needed. But, you can't have Catholic Academic institutions living inside the confines of a sealed plastic bag. I'm pretty sure that's called being Amish.
My Grandmother never accepted Vatican II and always liked the old Latin mass. I can't blame her, it's what she was comfortable with. But, if the Church can survive Vatican II, surely Catholic academic institutions should be able to explore ideas that aren't always in line with the Catholic Doctrine without it ruining our faith.
The Vatican is going to always remain pretty conservative, but I think there is value in Catholic academic institutions exploring a lot of different ideas.
Orrrr should we can go back and excommunicate Galileo. Again.
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 26, 2012, 08:39:45 AM
This is the single most significant post in the thread. The argument only exists because people disagree with what the professors are saying, not because of how they're doing it. If they made the opposite point, their critics would be silent as the grave right now.
[/quote
"if they made the opposite point, their critics would remain silent" ????? is that supposed to be funny or serious cuz if you're serious it's a nice attempt to "shut up" the critics in my humble opinion...
Quote from: brewcity77 on May 26, 2012, 08:39:45 AM
This is the single most significant post in the thread. The argument only exists because people disagree with what the professors are saying, not because of how they're doing it. If they made the opposite point, their critics would be silent as the grave right now.
Hey wyzgy, wanna quote this one again? I don't think twice is near enough.
Be honest. Would you be raising a stink right now if a group of Marquette professors had endorsed Ryan's budget? And don't just kneejerk your way a "yes" because it "doesn't fit their (sic, meaning "your") agenda". I have a feeling you wouldn't have said a word, if you did, it would have been one of support because it supported your own views.
Quote from: brewcity77 on June 01, 2012, 12:01:19 PM
Hey wyzgy, wanna quote this one again? I don't think twice is near enough.
Be honest. Would you be raising a stink right now if a group of Marquette professors had endorsed Ryan's budget?
Not if they were economics professors. At least they would be speaking from their area of academic expertise.
That being said, I don't think I would have an issue with the professors who teach social justice or public policy giving their opinion, either, no matter which way they sided. That would be an analysis based on their years of related study and research. But to have some English or Mechanical Engineering professor putting in his two cents on this issue in his capacity as a Marquette "representative", not so much.
I thought this thread was dead, but thanks for giving me an excuse to lock it!