I came across this nifty little article as I was perusing my mom’s Post Tribune paper. A8 of the paper is typically the Opinion section. The top of the page contains “Our View” editorials of various Post Tribune Staff writers and then the bottom is labeled Your Views, where readers can respond to previous “Our View” articles.
First I find it interesting that directly in the middle of the page amidst the articles and political cartoons is The First Amendment. It’s just right there just below the post tribune editorials. So is it there to remind people that everybody has their own opinions and to not go off the deep end? Is it there to remind people that it is within their rights to respond to these opinions? Regardless of the reason, it’s there. I was kind of pleasantly surprised to see it there, considering the context of this class.
So the “Your View” letter was titled “Academic freedom not the issue at ND.” The writers are responding to a May 10 article by Richard Schneirov who stated that President Obama should be allowed to speak at Notre Dame’s commencement because of academic freedom. The authors say “opponents of the Obama invitation agree with Schneirov that fostering public discourse is part of the work of a university, and that politicians of various viewpoints, even the pro-choice viewpoint, should be permitted to speak on campus. The authors' issue is that commencement is not a planned forum where views can be discussed, there is no debate or Q&A planned.
What Notre Dame is doing is privileging somebody with an honorary degree and the title of commencement speaker who is pro-choice. The authors remind that “the Catholic Church considers abortion intrinsically evil – always and everywhere.” They also present some interesting analogies. Would Notre Dame invite a Holocaust denier to deliver the commencement address or a segregationist?
So I’m a little torn on this issue. I do think that Obama has a right to speak but I understand the other side of the issue. Notre Dame is a Catholic University and Obama is pro-choice. But is this single issue enough to deny him the privilege? Obviously he spoke at the ceremony and protestors protested and eventually the controversy died down. But I think the issue remains. Should Notre Dame have asked somebody who holds principles so opposite to the Church’s.
This whole scenario reminds me so much of my request for reconsideration case. More on that later…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I watched the president's address at ND on television. I think it was the best speech I've heard him deliver. He acknowledged the differences, but didn't make that the focus. He instead focused on how to work together with people who see things differently. It is a very important message. It is so easy to demonize those who disagree with us rather than to work together in areas that we do agree.
ReplyDeleteAnother matter to consider is that they ask each president to speak at their commencement. If every person who had different beliefs were ruled out, the only person qualified to speak would be the pope. I know, I am overgeneralizing, but he is our PRESIDENT. Even though he has a different opinion, he still deserves respect and IMO the invitation to speak at commencement.
ReplyDeleteI was in the midst of all this, living in South Bend. My husband goes to the University of Notre Dame, so we saw all the protesters and even the plane that was flown above campus with a large banner criticizing the decision. But maybe it's worth noting that my husband is not Catholic, nor is he of any religion. The University of Notre Dame accepts people of various religious backgrounds, or even no religious background. I don't see how the University could do this, while silencing the views of people who are non-Catholic. My husband, who is pro-choice, will be getting a degree there, why can't Obama? Also, it is a University before anything else, and if one can't respect and listen to opposing viewpoints in such a setting, then I don't know where one can.
ReplyDeleteI looked up Notre Dame's mission statement, and I think these couple of lines say a lot about this issue: "As a Catholic university, one of its distinctive goals is to provide a forum where, through free inquiry and open discussion, the various lines of Catholic thought may intersect with all the forms of knowledge found in the arts, sciences, professions, and every other area of human scholarship and creativity.
ReplyDeleteThe intellectual interchange essential to a university requires, and is enriched by, the presence and voices of diverse scholars and students." I can see where the article is coming from, in that the commencement speech was not an open debate, but the purpose of the speech was not to speak about abortion. It was totally in keeping with the University's goals to invite a 'scholar' with a 'diverse viewpoint' to speak.
Becky - I like the approach that you took. Looking up the Mission Statement was a genius idea. And I say that seriously and jokingly because this is exactly what I did for my request for reconsideration paper. I'm pro keeping The Golden Compass and the Catholic School District is against it. It is quite handy to look up those mission statements and relate them to the topic at hand.
ReplyDeleteAnd the key to the ND mission statement is "all forms of knowledge" - that pretty much includes everything.
Well, it was late last night when I overheard this, but they were discussing the whole Obama speech at Notre Dame on Bill O'Reilly. They made two points that were rather interesting in terms of this debate. Speaking at Notre Dame didn't cause Obama damage either way. However, Notre Dame has lost tons of money in donations as a result of allowing him to speak. I don't know if this is substantiated, but wow, if that's true, wow.
ReplyDelete