MU Prof Bans Intellectual Discussion

Not that long ago, one went to college to have intellectual discussions in class, beginning with stuff like "first principles" and "laws of nature" and--in some colleges--"laws of God."

Well, at Marquette University, such silly, arcane, old crap has been eliminated in the Philosophy (!!!!) Department's Ethics branch.

A student we know was in a philosophy class (“Theory of Ethics”), and the instructor (one Cheryl Abbate) was attempting to apply a philosophical text to modern political controversies. So far so good.

She listed some issues on the board, and came to “gay rights.” She then airily said that “everybody agrees on this, and there is no need to discuss it.”

The student, a conservative who disagrees with some of the gay lobby’s notions of “gay rights” (such as gay marriage) approached her after class and told her he thought the issue deserved to be discussed. Indeed, he told Abbate that if she dismisses an entire argument because of her personal views, that sets a terrible precedent for the class....

Ah, you foolish yout'!!  "Gay rights" is settled science, just like Global Warming.  (See this week's weather forecast for details....)   You paid $16K to MU so that you could learn that, Dummy.

....Abbate explained that “some opinions are not appropriate, such as racist opinions, sexist opinions” and then went on to ask “do you know if anyone in your class is homosexual?” And further “don’t you think it would be offensive to them” if some student raised his hand and challenged gay marriage? The point being, apparently that any gay classmates should not be subjected to hearing any disagreement with their presumed policy views....

...She further said she would “take offense” if the student said that women can’t serve in particular roles. And she added that somebody who is homosexual would experience similar offense if somebody opposed gay marriage in class. ...


Umnnhhhh...I'd love to see Abbate 'serve in the role' of a man in the .....ahhh.......procreative act.......for example.  But that would be a "Law of Nature" thing which--as the student learned--is not subject to discussion, I guess.