MU continues down a path I cannot support

[wyzgy]

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.   

[GGGG]

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.

[wyzgy]

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?

[tower912]

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?

[brewcity77]

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.

[wyzgy]

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. 

[GGGG]

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.

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.

[NavinRJohnson]

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/

[GGGG]

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.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

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/

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.

[wyzgy]

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...

[brewcity77]

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.

[warriorchick]

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.

[rocky_warrior]

I thought this thread was dead, but thanks for giving me an excuse to lock it!