RECENT  POSTS:  » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way » On Rivka, Robert and their dirty, self-victimizing, anti-intellectual blame game » POTUS believes in fifty-state equality, happy with way it's playing out  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


BC Law issues carefully parsed letter; We say: Fair-minded laws deserve preferential treatment

by Jeremy Hooper

When you decide to televise your discriminatory teachings, your employer is sometimes forced to respond:

Screen Shot 2009-09-17 At 8.33.10 Am

The whole diversity of viewpoints thing is fine and dandy. But society is not wrong to place a premium on those views which seek peace and equality rather than bias and injustice. In a debate where one side is denying and disrespecting the fact that all citizens are created equal, all points of view surrounding that debate are simply not equal!

For now, letters like this are still the de rigueur, clean hands way to handle the gay rights back-and-forth. But just like Mr. Fitzgibbon's views, this sort of document will someday serve as an eye-opening artifact from a time when the fight to help vs. hurt American families was all-too-widely considered a casual, "let's agree to disagree" situation. So anyone (especially the dean of a school of constitutional law) who wanted to go ahead and take a stand against the aggressor in this unbalanced fight would not be acting unfairly or disrespecting the discourse -- they would be taking a principled stand against a "culture war" that has unfairly disrespected countless many LGBT peeps!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

It's hard to believe that in a school which purports that it doesn't discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, that LGBT students in Fitzgibbon's classes would be afforded fair treatment. When he so blatantly decries equal protection in public, it is hard to believe that he practices equality in private.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Sep 17, 2009 11:34:47 AM

So I assume they also wouldnt fire someone if they were actively campaigning against interracial marriage? fair is fair after all.

Posted by: penguinsaur | Sep 17, 2009 1:17:03 PM

This professor has shown his bias and bigotry and should be fired based upon the tenets of his own school. No one at that school, who professes to hold up religion before the law should be in residence and teaching students. The dean of this school is just WRONG.

Posted by: Mykelb | Sep 17, 2009 2:21:35 PM

While nobody wants to admit it, there are plenty of people out there who can make a rather convincing legal argument to prevent same-sex marriage without having to resort to religion as the overt reason why.

That's why they're called "lawyers."

If I were a BC student, I would object to taking this man's class, if only because of the vitriol I'd reserve for him. But I'd gladly attend BC, where people are allowed to retain their beliefs.

It wasn't too long ago that institutions far and wide were firing teachers and staff for supporting GLBT causes... let alone being gay themselves. I won't disallow someone else's opinion - so long as their opinion doesn't negate the validity of mine.

Posted by: Tommy | Sep 17, 2009 7:50:47 PM

Well Tommy, I, for one, do not want to deny Mr. Fitzgibbon of his opinion, employment, etc. But it is a little tiresome to have this debate presented as a two-sided, agree to disagree debate when the truth is that it's a situation wherein one sided is waging war against gay lives, loves, and liberties. I'm suggesting that the university can absolutely defend his right to say whatever he wishes, and let the marketplace of ideas/public opinion decide his career's fate. But at the same time, it would not be wrong for them to come out as being on the pro-equality side.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 17, 2009 8:07:28 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails