Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Professor Blatantly Requires Students To Profess Beliefs They Don't Have

Assuming at least some of what's in the student's lawsuit is accurate, I can already hear Ricky saying, "Lucy, you got some 'splainin' to do."

The lawsuit, Brooker v. The Governors of Missouri State University (MSU), was filed on Oct. 30 by the Alliance Defend Fund on behalf of Emily Brooker, a student in the university's school of social work. The ADF, a Christian legal group that advocates religious freedom, accuses tax-funded MSU of retaliating against Brooker because she refused to sign a letter to the Missouri Legislature in support of homosexual adoption as part of a class project.

Wow. That's so blatant that it amazes even me--and you'd think that I'd expect this kind of stuff. So the professor and the school apologized to the student, right? Of course--in Alternate Reality World.

On Dec. 16, Brooker faced a two-and-a-half hour ethics review conducted by faculty, including Kauffman. Brooker was permitted neither legal representation nor her parents' presence. A written transcript of the meeting was not allowed.

It should be noted, however, that this is standard procedure in academia. Closed and unrecorded hearings at which students are not allowed legal representation are common on campuses across North America.

Again, wow. And remember, this is a state school that gets taxpayer money--so check out this little First Amendment faux pas:

In their third accusation, the committee allegedly claimed "that Ms. Brooker's Christian beliefs conflicted with the National Association of Social Worker Code of Ethics (NASWCE)." It demanded she write a paper on how to "lessen the gap" between her personal beliefs and professional obligations.

Let me remind you that her personal beliefs at issue here relate to homosexual adoption--and while I may or may not share her particular views on this topic, she's not far from the mainstream at all.

Here's another case in point:

[L]ast year Rhode Island College’s School of Social Work required a master’s degree student, who identified himself as politically conservative, to publicly advocate for political causes to which he morally objected. When the student refused, he was informed "he could no longer pursue a master’s degree in social work policy" at the college.

I guess you can't be a conservative and a social worker. So much for that whole liberal "diversity" thing.


Chanman said...

One of my favorite columnists, Professor Mike Adams of UNC-Wilmington, wrote a rather amusing piece on the Missouri State affair:

Darren said...

Adams is great.

rightwingprof said...

While I agree with your point, can I play devil's advocate for a moment? This is rather like taking a "wimmin's studies" course and then objecting to pro-abortion articles in the reading material. I mean, what is more leftist than social work, other than perhaps therapy?

I guess what I'm trying to say is what were these students thinking? This smacks of students taking a course solely to challenge the content -- which, no matter how moonbatty a course may be, is inappropriate.

Back in the 80s the day after I gave a final, a student came into my office to tell me that she had taken my class to rate me for the Moral Majority and that I had "passed." Forgive the liberalesque language, but I felt violated and betrayed. And I really have no use for that sort of thing, no matter how little use I have for moonbatty nonsense on campus.

Darren said...

I disagree with the premise that one cannot be a political or social conservative and want to be a social worker. Neither must one be conservative to be in the military, or liberal to be a teacher.

Anonymous said...

Okay, but don't you think homosexual children should be able to be adopted?

Anonymous said...

The student was obviously not taking the course just to cause problems. Read more, she graduated with a degree in Social work. The course was required for her degree and this was the only teacher. She had already endured another requisite course with this nutty professor but she had no other choice. She had to take the class. Her rights were indeed severely violated.

rightwingprof said...

"Okay, but don't you think homosexual children should be able to be adopted?"

Do what?

Anonymous said...

She did not disagree with homosexual children being adopted. She disagreed with homosexual couples adopting children. Big difference.