Firing the 'Politically Incorrect' is censorship

HoustonChronicle.com ^ | Nov. 14, 2001, 6:17PM | NORAH VINCENT

[jeremiah]

You can fire a person for being a bad and incompetent teacher Since when is this true, not with tenure. This man, and the others are bad, incompetent, and downright dangerous. They are supposed to teach, not indoctrinate. If only we could go back in history, and get rid of all of the fruits and nuts during the sixties that were busy ruining the generation of Clinton et al.

[sakic]

I didn't win any awards, although I was nominated. Your failure to understand the meaning of free speech is amazing.

[brownie]

So, This "reporter" should not have made these comments until the professor got fired? It seems to me he has not been fired yet (i.e., he has not even "almost" lost his job). Therefore, people calling for him to be fired is not censorship, just as people calling for the ouster of John Rocker was not cencorship.

Does this "reporter" then believe that I can come to work and call asian-americans "gooks" and not be fired? After all, I have a free-speech right to say unpopular things, and there should be a law that I cannot be fired for saying such things. Of course, my employer could be continually sued for not stopping me, but the free-speech law would not allow them to fire or discipline me. This is brilliant. I geuss I could walk up to the president of the company and call him an **shole and be protected by the free-speech job guarantee law. What a wonderful world this would be.

Or, as I would surmise, does the reporter believe that only certain opinions should be protected with this free-speech job-guarantee law? I.e., he and his liberal friends would decide what speech deserves the job-guarantee protection. I wonder.

[A. Pole]

I strogly disagree, our education system is gone to the dogs. They are teaching our children to be mindless sheep who can't think.

Are you saying that rewarding professors for conforming to the views dominant at certain moment (such views will be used as a standard of promotion/dismissal/retention) and pusnishing those who differ will improve the quality of education? And will it increase freedom in Amercian society?

[dirtboy]

A show's livelihood should not depend on its purveyance of correct speech, even when we're at war.

Advertisers should be forced, by contract, to commit their advertisements for a specified amount of time, regardless of what happens on a show. Either that or the networks should use a small portion of all advertising revenues for an insurance fund to cover pullouts. Otherwise Madison Avenue is, in effect, playing Big Brother.

Amazing. Make speech free by forcing others to pay for it, whether they want to or not. Move over, Orwell...

[brownie]

And to all of those out there, the 1st amendment only guarantees that gov't won't limit free speech, not that individuals or corporations have to continue to pay someone who states something the individual or corporation do not like. That's called freedom. I'm free to hire you, and I'm free to fire you. You are free to say what you want, and you are free to look for another job. If I am forced to continue to employ you and pay you despite everything you say and do, I am not free.

[brownie]

bold off (I hope)

[brownie]

I'll try again. There's nothing like actually reading the directions. I missed the / in the directions the first 2 times around.

[okiedust]

If she wants to force companies to pay for advertisements for shows because they are political, then I suppose she wants to force the shows to accept money and advertisements for products that don't reach a target audience? (i.e. tampon adverts during the superbowl say?), or better yet, force the campus newspapers to accept David Horowitz's paid add stating the ten reasons reparations are a bad idea. Stupid woman. I just love it when free speech meets free enterprise. I don't think the lady understands either.

regards

[Restorer]

There was a TV movie a few years back about the fearlessness of Canadian activists who got a Canadian schoolteacher fired for daring to question some aspects of the Holocaust story. The censors were the heroes of the story.

I'm not a Holocaust-denier, but some would limit any discussion about actual numbers, motivations, etc. to only the Received Truth.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

I concur.

Better watch out, agreeing with me can get you banned around here.

[mgc1122]

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with your analysis about gubbmit perfessors being exempted from ramifications of free speech. Only tenure, not the USCON, prevents these idiots from being fired for terminal stupidity and terminal arrogance.

[mgc1122]

"It is plainly obvious such a firing would have a chilling effect on free speech. If he is wrong then verbaally lamblast him."

Chilling effect on free speech? No, but it might make some of these free riders think a bit before flapping their gums a bit.

[poet]

You're forgetting one thing: These are there by design! Wasn't it the russian general malinovsky who said " give me two generations of you education system and I will give you a new soviet man"? Well they've had more than two gens
and we see the results each and every day.
The school systems are no longer public, they are government therefore, they are nothing more than propaganda institutions. The curriculum? Promoting the gay lifestyle, giving out condoms, male bashing, anti-Americanism, feminizing the boys, "feel things out" not think things out.

[wwjdn]

No, they are hired to teach, not to preach their views on our military (one of their favorite topics). There are a lot of professors that convince students that the military is evil. As a Vietnam veteran this upsets me. Imagine that...

[A. Pole]

No, they are hired to teach, not to preach their views on our military (one of their favorite topics).

Clearly, you have no clue what the University is supposed to be about. Professors should not be just a bunch of hirelings giving the expensive job training. Tenure is a way to secure the free inquiry and experimentation at the price of toleration of many idiots, loonies etc. But the edifice of Western civilisation has some costs. Keep your hand away you ignorant barbarian!

[FReethesheeples]

Bull#@$%

[FReethesheeples]

Bull#@$%

They are free to speak,a s long as they don't advocate treason or insurrection, etc.

They do NOT, however,

have an absolute "RIGHT" to a "JOB" (that is a bizarre notion and reflects spoiled, confused, fuzzy, and appallingly ARROGGANT(!) thinking),

--- and they have the responsibility of being ACCOUNTABLE for their views and must,

--- like the men they never are,

be accountable and take the CONSEQUENCES of expressing their opinions,

just as Throeau and otthers have always said was the case!

[FReethesheeples]

Bull#@$%

They are free to speak,a s long as they don't advocate treason or insurrection, etc.

They do NOT, however,

have an absolute "RIGHT" to a "JOB" (that is a bizarre notion and reflects spoiled, confused, fuzzy, and appallingly ARROGGANT(!) thinking),

--- and they have the responsibility of being ACCOUNTABLE for their views and must,

--- like the men they never are,

be accountable and take the CONSEQUENCES of expressing their opinions,

just as Throeau and otthers have always said was the case!

[FReethesheeples]

Bull#@$%

They are free to speak,a s long as they don't advocate treason or insurrection, etc.

They do NOT, however,

have an absolute "RIGHT" to a "JOB" (that is a bizarre notion and reflects spoiled, confused, fuzzy, and appallingly ARROGGANT(!) thinking),

--- and they have the responsibility of being ACCOUNTABLE for their views and must,

--- like the men they never are,

be accountable and take the CONSEQUENCES of expressing their opinions,

just as Throeau and otthers have always said was the case!