« Top Presidents Review Part 7 | Main | And The Winner(s) Are... »

Proof that academia has lost its mind

It's the end of the year, and just in time for Jason Mattera to bring us the Young Americas Foundation top ten list of the worst academia abuses of 2008. Going to college as a conservative, after all, is only OK if you keep your head down and your mouth shut. Tolerance is preached, not practiced, on college campuses where unhinged liberalism runs wild and free speech is only something to give lip service to.

Don't quite buy the hype? Here are just a few examples from Jason's disturbing list (emphasis in the original):

Banned conservative speakers, stolen votes, assaults on religious liberty, gay English classes, and forbidden Thanksgiving & Christmas celebrations

Political correctness ran amuck in our nation's school system this past year, and Young America's Foundation has once again compiled our "best of the worst" academic abuses for 2008. From "free speech zones" to transgendered speakers at military academies, the following list may make you both laugh and cry in the same breath. That probably isn't too surprising, however, since we are talking about academia after all...

1. The free speech "zone." A student at Yuba College in California was sent an ultimatum by the school's president: discontinue handing out gospel booklets or face disciplinary action and possibly expulsion. That's right--gospel booklets. Ryan Dozier, the 20-year-old student, had the audacity to distribute Christian literature without a school permit, which restricts free speech to an hour each Tuesday and Thursday. Yuba College even directs students to where on campus they are allowed to exhibit free speech. In this case, it's the school theater. Campus police threatened to arrest Ryan if he didn't comply with the "free speech zone," oblivious to the fact that students don't need permission to exercise the First Amendment's free speech and religious clauses.

... 6. You can't pray here! The First Amendment, is it a bestowed right given from above and protected by our government or a meaningless, antiquated concept to be disposed of? If you're the folks at the College of Alameda in California, you'd pick the latter. How else do you explain their threatening to expel a student who prayed on campus? It all started when a student, Kandy Kyriacou, visited her professor to give her a Christmas gift. But when Kandy saw that her teacher was ill, she offered to pray for her. The professor agreed. That's when Derek Piazza, another professor, walked in and freaked out that a prayer--gasp, a prayer--was occurring on college premises. "You can't be doing that in here," Piazza purportedly barked. Kandy received a retroactive "intent to suspend" letter from the administration, claiming that she was guilty of "disruptive or insulting behavior" and "persistent abuse of" college employees. Further infractions would result in expulsion, the letter read.

... 10. Who knew? Universal health care is actually a non partisan issue. Administrators at the College of St. Catherine in St. Paul, Minnesota--the nation's largest Catholic women's college--unexpectedly blocked young conservatives on campus from hosting Bay Buchanan, a popular conservative commentator and U.S. Treasurer under President Reagan. College officials deemed Ms. Buchanan's remarks on "Feminism and the 2008 Election" too politically charged, citing concerns about the school's tax status. Those same "concerns," mind you, didn't prohibit the school from sponsoring programs that push for universal healthcare and minimum wage increases or hosting Frank Kroncke, an anti-war radical who is reliving the Vietnam days. But Bay Buchanan? Well, she's partisan, according to St. Catherine's administration.

And those are just three examples -- make you sure you go see the entire list.

Of course, there will undoubtedly be those who will whine that this is just cherry-picking, that most college campuses aren't like this and conservatives are just trying to give liberals a bad name. I don't doubt that some liberals will look at this list and see absolutely nothing wrong. The thing is, the abuses on this list are by no means an anomaly. You can find countless examples of egregious behavior like those listed above at FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. On college campuses, thanks to the liberal strangehold found on virtually every campus, it's free speech for me and not for thee. Only certain kinds of expression are allowed.

Yet somehow, we're still expected to spend thousands of dollars "educating" our children there.

Hat Tip: Hot Air


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/33540.

Comments (12)

Shouldn't that be "More Pro... (Below threshold)
saterp:

Shouldn't that be "More Proof..."?

It's not like there's been a shortage of evidence that many in academia are lunatics.

Here are some places that n... (Below threshold)
Spurwing Plover:

Here are some places that need to have their piggie banks taken away and see how they like that SCREW LIBERAL PLACES OF LOWER LEARNING

"Yuba College even... (Below threshold)
Mike:
"Yuba College even directs students to where on campus they are allowed to exhibit free speech. In this case, it's the school theater."

Well, as long as the theater isn't crowded, and no one is yelling "fire," then everything is okay ... isn't it?

Bush literally invented<... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Bush literally invented the free speech zone. Reap what you sow.

And your Ashley-Todd-sense should be telling you that there's more to the College of Alameda story than is being reported in the Christian press.

Shorter Cassy.

Brian,Bush did not i... (Below threshold)
Eric:

Brian,
Bush did not invent Free Speech Zones. The first Free Speech Zone was created by Andrew Young (D) in Atlanta for the 1988 Democratic National Convention. Ironically, the Republican candidate in 1988 was Bush's father.

Even <a href="http://soccer... (Below threshold)
Marc:
Actually, Eric, we're both ... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Actually, Eric, we're both wrong. Free speech zones were apparently used during Vietnam-era protests. Regardless, Bush has been a regular supporter and the largest presidential user of free speech zones since. Again, reap what you sow.

Hmm, I went looking for a n... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Hmm, I went looking for a new image for a "standard Marc" post, but I couldn't find anything that indicates someone standing around awkwardly waiting for someone else to make a point, and then droolingly pulling out his one tired, repetitive signature line in an attempt to appear involved in some way. So this will have to do.

"lawyer"marc couldn't make ... (Below threshold)
JFO:

"lawyer"marc couldn't make a point with a sharp stick. They really ought to have an asshat of the month award here and he'd win it every single one of them.

Brian,I find it in... (Below threshold)
Churt:

Brian,

I find it interesting how the free speech argument is one directional. Is it considered fine for the protesters to violate Bush's right to free speech? He does share that right you know. These protesters can demonstrate for the news anytime they want. The fact that they are held a distance from the place where Bush has come to speak is not suppression of free speech. Quite the contrary. These same protesters can hold a conference or some such, invite the press and bad mouth Bush all they want on their own dime.

The issue on campus is not about preventing an organized speech from being disrupted. It's about students free speech on campus. And it's about equal opportunity for the expression of different opinions. I don't think a school should be able to filter who gets to speak on the basis of political alignment. Not a publicly funded organization anyway. If an organized speech is under way I don't think any group has the right to try and disrupt it. Regardless of who's opinion is being expressed. That's just rude and uncivilized. If you have a different opinion, by all means challenge the other to an organized debate or hold your own speech. Personal conversations on a campus should not generally be grounds for arresting people. Saying a prayer for someone with their consent shouldn't either. You say there is more to that story. Possibly, but you failed to state what made the school's position excusable.

I don't want anyone's right to free speech trampled on. Be that President Bush or that guy in high school I never got along with. If you have a real example of Bush violating someone's freedom of speech, I'm more than willing to agree he has if I can verify the claim. But screaming that Bush did it does not make the other incidents excusable in any way. It's not right for liberal or conservative to violate those rights set down in the constitution.

Enough said.

Is it considered fine fo... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Is it considered fine for the protesters to violate Bush's right to free speech?

Thus demonstrating that you don't understand what "right to free speech" even means.

If you have a real example of Bush violating someone's freedom of speech, I'm more than willing to agree he has if I can verify the claim.

How generous of you. You're incapable of making a determination on your own, but you're more than willing to agree if someone else tells you about it. How about a district court?

At Bill's trial, a Pittsburgh detective testified that the Secret Service had instructed local police to confine "people that were making a statement pretty much against the President and his views." The district court judge not only tossed out the silly charges against Neel but scolded the prosecution: "I believe this is America. Whatever happened to 'I don't agree with you, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it'?"

One of the few to go to trial, because the prosecutors usually drop it once the people are whisked away.

Read on. And here's a good one.

It's worth you getting a little more educated about the roles of the government and the people regarding free speech issues.

Brian,I understand... (Below threshold)
Churt:

Brian,

I understand the right to free speech just fine. I stated my position quite well. I am also quite able to make the determination on my own.

In your original post you made claims without giving specific backup information. Also, as I was pointing out, Bush's actions one way or another do not make the schools action excusable. Therefore your original post did not even properly address the issue of the blog entry. Your follow up post does present information that leads me to agree that the Bush administration did violate people's right to free speech. Thank you.

As for your insulting tone, grow up. Your original post was pitiful. Bush didn't event FSZ. They've been used for many years by both parties. As for there being more to the Almeda story, perhaps. But that's just speculation and in no way relevant.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy