Posted on 05/07/2005 2:23:04 PM PDT by aculeus
A Columbia University body that helps set policy voted yesterday to reject a resolution calling for reinstatement of the R.O.T.C., which has been banned from the campus since 1969.
Columbia students who want to enroll in the Reserve Officers Training Corps must continue to do so at nearby universities, including the Bronx campus of Fordham University.
The vote is a setback for a group of students, professors and alumni who have been campaigning on campus to change the perception of the military and build momentum for the return of the R.O.T.C. Susan Brown, a spokeswoman for the university, said in a statement that the administration respected the decision by the university's senate, a body made up mostly of faculty members, students and administrators. The decision is nonbinding.
The vote, which followed a two-hour debate that centered on discrimination by the military against people who are openly gay, was 51 to 11. Several participants called it surprisingly lopsided.
Alan Brinkley, Columbia's provost, said that he and the university's president, Lee C. Bollinger, had sought a decision to "get a sense of the community." Mr. Brinkley said he had abstained from voting, while Mr. Bollinger voted against the resolution, according to Thomas M. Mathewson, the senate's manager.
Michael Adler, a professor at Columbia's business school and one of the senators who voted for returning the R.O.T.C., said of the vote: "I thought it was disappointing. I found my own military service to be maturing. The military offers students the taste of command before they're 21."
Those who supported reinstatement of the program said they believed a vote in 2003, in which a majority of polled students opposed the ban, lent weight to their campaign.
One supporter of the R.O.T.C. said yesterday that the Sept. 11 attacks may have softened attitudes toward the military. The R.O.T.C. program at Columbia was ended at a time when opposition to the Vietnam War was churning on campus.
Although most students are taking final exams, the auditorium where the senators voted yesterday was filled by students holding signs, most of them opposing the military program's return. Outside the building, supporters had hung their own signs, including several that read, "A Vote for R.O.T.C. is a Vote for the Heroes of Our Generation."
The debate also included arguments over a case before the United States Supreme Court involving the Solomon Amendment, which requires universities that receive federal financing to give the military access to campuses. Several senators said they feared that continuing to bar the R.O.T.C. could provoke retribution from the government.
But the most passionate arguments against the R.O.T.C.'s return were based on the link between the military's policy on gays and Columbia's nondiscrimination policy.
"Would we agree to an organization on campus," Mr. Brinkley said, that allowed "African-Americans to join this organization only if they pass for white?"
"Is there a difference?" he asked. "Does the moral weight of the demands by gays and lesbians have less moral weight than demands by any other minority?" His words were received with sustained applause.
Scott Stewart, a student in the School of General Studies, said he supported the R.O.T.C.'s return to Columbia. A former Army infantryman, Mr. Stewart, who is gay, said he had been open about his sexuality while in the military, and had worked to change that institution "from the inside." He supported the R.O.T.C., he said, because he wants Columbia to influence the debate over the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Despite his position on the issue, Mr. Stewart said he was going out after the vote with the victors.
* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
If you are accepted in ROTC, doesn't the DOD pay your tuition? If I had a choice between Columbia and Fordham, Columbia would lose in a hurry. I have two offspring that went through the Jesuit system. For the most part I haven't had any complaints.
Oddly, I have no problem with this ban. I also have no problem with ALL taxpayer dollars being withheld as a result of this ban. Actions=>consequences.
Why should they support those who fight so that they might continue to enjoy it?
Ungrateful wretches.
My vote is sent the dollars to another college.
Not surprising. The Columbia administration and most of the faculty claim to be for "diversity", but they hate the U.S. military, hate President Bush, hate capitalism, support Hamas and other radical Islamic terrorists, despise practicing Christians, and harrass Jewish students on campus. They would rather defend homosexual sodomites than support the U.S. Constitution.
Only a fool would pay to have his or her kid attend Columbia.
That was basically my response to my Michael Moore-feting alma mater when they called me last month look for alumni bucks. According to the student on the other end, I had plenty of company.
OK Columbia U can do that.
Response Should be: ALL and we mean ALL federal funds, research grants, pell grants, scholarships ALL federal $$$ of any kind just stopped.
Wonder how long it would take after that for them to change their minds.
If we can't vote against abortion, why should they be able to vote against the ROTC?
Well done, sir. If we keep refusing to fund the leftists, they will be left with the choice of stopping or using their own money for socialist indoctrination.
Either way, they'll soon stop.
$100,000 for this student's education and he comes up with logic like this? What a waste of money.
No as to the tuition assumption. There is a small stipend for advanced ROTC students.
Yes--there is a difference. Race is sacred and a gift given by God the Almighty. Homosexuality is sin.
"Does the moral weight of the demands by gays and lesbians have less moral weight than demands by any other minority?"
Homosexuals have no moral right to sin, nor does anyone else. Therefore, his rhetorical question is a a sophistical straw man.
His words were received with sustained applause.
Naturally.
You're going to be denying yourself a first-rate education if you choose not to go to Columbia. And it's a huge mistake to vote on a single issue. I bet you would disagree with the positions of some faculty members at every school in the country. So good luck finding some place to go.
First rate education or indoctrination? With the logic the members of the student senate display I most respectfully disagree with your statement. I hope they get all there federal funding including student loans yanked for this. I think it is very easy to find a college that acts less ungrateful, hypocritical or assinine than this one.
Are you a real middie? Has ROTC changed? Used to be full tuition plus $100/month starting first week freshman year. And that was 25 tears ago - motnhly stipend must be more now.
Does this mean there haven't been or are extremely few officers in our military from Columbia in 35 years?
No leftist bias here.
I wonder - since this is state sponsored discrimination of our military - does that mean discrimination is OK? It is state sponsored becuase of the massive amounts of government funds going to Columbia from mutliple sources.
Frankly it is stomach turning.
I went to Cornell in 1979 (full scholarship) because they had ROTC and Columbia didn't. My sister attended Columbia a few years later. She is a Michael Moore leftist. This article explains why.
Should we all discriminate against Columbia grads and gays because they are promoting discrimination of us?
Diva's Husband
Obviously you are confused. By evidence of this vote Columbia is a joke. These people are out of touch with the reality of where their freedoms and funds come from.
They promote discrimination to protest perceived discrimination. Illogical. They are spoiled anti-military leftists who cannot think straight.
They are fundementally flawed. They are not first rate.
Diva's Husband
The tuition, books, & fees plus monthly stipend was from a competitively-awarded scholarship. All ROTC cadets electing to go through the Advanced program during their Junior and Senior years sign a military contract and get the monthly stipend. The contract specifies a requirement to serve upon graduation and commissioning. Stipend is now $200, IIRC.
My response is based upon being privileged to attend Oklahoma State University on a 4-year Army ROTC scholarship (1973-77) and then to serve as a Field Artillery officer on active duty in West Germany and the Oklahoma Army National Guard. I had one officer in my Officer Basic Course from Cornell -- sharp guy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.