Remember that story last year, “University to student: Endorse being ‘gay’ or leave?” Well, via the phi beta cons blog (which is sponsored by the conservative National Review and is a blog that describes itself as “the right take on higher ed”) comes this: “No Qualified Immunity for Professors at Eastern Michigan University?” As I am not a lawyer and I have not been following this case, I don’t entirely understand what the “big deal” is here. It points out that students are protected by the first and fourteenth amendment, but to me, that doesn’t mean that a student is automatically protected from being “wrong” and being dismissed from a program.
Donate!
Recent Comments
- Bud Gibson on Restaurant Review: Wurst Bar
- Bud Gibson on “Fiscal study: Michigan athletics are self-reliant; MSU is close”
- Claire on “Fiscal study: Michigan athletics are self-reliant; MSU is close”
- grady on “Fiscal study: Michigan athletics are self-reliant; MSU is close”
- Curious on “Fiscal study: Michigan athletics are self-reliant; MSU is close”
- Mark Higbee on “Fiscal study: Michigan athletics are self-reliant; MSU is close”
- sitedad on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- emuhomer31 on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- emuhomer31 on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- emuhomer31 on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- sitedad on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- sitedad on “What does $1 Trillion in Student Debt Really Mean? Maybe Not That Much”
- Steve Pierce on “What does $1 Trillion in Student Debt Really Mean? Maybe Not That Much”
- aginghippie on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- Mark Higbee on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- sitedad on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- Jason McCay on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- sitedad on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- Mark Higbee on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
- Jules on Provost’s update on the GradeFirst “snafu”
EMU Bloggers
EMU Links
Higher Education News
In the Local Media
Ypsi-Arbor Bloggers
From the court document: “Qualified immunity protects state officials sued in their individual capacities from civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”" It appears that the court found that the conduct might have violated those rights, and so the individuals do not get qualified immunity; in other words, because a reasonable person would have known about those rights, the individuals can be held personally liable.
Sounds like great news for Common Sense in the Court Rooms.
Sorry this goes against Sitedad and pretty much the prevailing winds of left leaning thought that permeates the discussion on emutalk.org for years….
But the only thing “wrong” about all of this are those who would find it “right” to discriminate against Christians like the EMU President Martin has done here by banning Julia Ward for LIFE from graduating EMU.
There is no discrimination going on with Julia because this is apples to oranges here.
So to explain Religious Beliefs to the Liberal public here from a Conservative interpretation:
It is not merely a BELIEF SYSTEM but it is fundamentally who you are as a person. To tell someone to “STOP BEING WHO YOU ARE” because Eastern Michigan University doesn’t like Christians with those Christian Beliefs, is discrimination. Julia Ward wanting to defer her client to a Counsler that is more compatible with the client is NOT discrimination.
You may as well ask me to stop being Caucasion.
Here’s a fair comparison. Should a NURSE be forced to assist an Abortion when he/she is against Abortion for Religious Beliefs and there are other NURSEs that he/she can defer to help?
EMU would dismiss the NURSE….FIRE the NURSE…. Just as a hospital did. What? Set aside one’s religious beliefs concerning Abortion and get right to it and abort the baby?
This kind of thinking is 100% left-leaning Academic Thinking and is way way way incompatible with Conservatives in Society. It is incompatible with me…. I would rather kill myself than to be forced to abort a baby because I should have to “Set aside my personal beliefs and get the job done.” I am just putting it as bluntly as possible.
I see no way EMU wins in court.
I’m not sure if it is “left-leaning Academic Thinking.” I’m a progressive liberal and was appalled by the actions of these individuals at EMU. It seems that one of the first rules of counseling is to know yourself, and your biases. It seems like the student did what she should have done–recognized that her assistance would probably not be in the best interest of the client, and work to find someone more appropriate. Would it be wrong for me to decline counseling an ex-felon convicted of rape if I had personal experience with sexual assault? My moral obligation would be to find someone to provide counseling, not provide it myself. I think Ms. Ward’s moral obligation would be the same–find someone who could provide counseling services to the client, not to counsel her when she had a personal/religious bias.