Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.
His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.
If he has tenure, he is.
People are entitled to have discriminatory opinions. I discriminate against tomatoes, for example. There’s something about the texture that makes me gag.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.
His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.
Yes he is. Professors and students alike have academic freedom and the freedom to express their opinions. Boise State is a public university, so they are required to respect an individuals' free speech rights.
He obviously has discriminatory beliefs against women. He should not be in a position to issue grades to them if he cannot be objective. I would have a problem with him if he were my DD's prof and I'd be loudly letting the university know that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.
His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.
Yes he is. Professors and students alike have academic freedom and the freedom to express their opinions. Boise State is a public university, so they are required to respect an individuals' free speech rights.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm of the opinion that, barring disability, if you get a tertiary degree in a competitive field with limited admission - you should be required to work in that field for 5-7 years full-time. Otherwise you are taking the opportunity away from someone who WILL use the degree and for the better of society. (And no I don't care if you were scholarship or full pay)
Far too many 'Mrs' degrees and proud SAHM/Ds blogs who say 'Oh I have a law degree from Harvard teehee but all I do all day is knit and change diapers'.
What a sad view of education.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.
His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.
Not true.
You're allowed to have discriminatory opinions. So long as you don't actually discriminate.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:He's entitled to his opinions.
His opinions are discriminatory and he's not entitled to keep his job.
Anonymous wrote:Don't make special effort to recruit me to dance ballet, no matter how few men dance ballet and you think how much lack of equity for men on the ballet stage.
Anonymous wrote:Don't make special effort to recruit me to dance ballet, no matter how few men dance ballet and you think how much lack of equity for men on the ballet stage.
Anonymous wrote:I'm of the opinion that, barring disability, if you get a tertiary degree in a competitive field with limited admission - you should be required to work in that field for 5-7 years full-time. Otherwise you are taking the opportunity away from someone who WILL use the degree and for the better of society. (And no I don't care if you were scholarship or full pay)
Far too many 'Mrs' degrees and proud SAHM/Ds blogs who say 'Oh I have a law degree from Harvard teehee but all I do all day is knit and change diapers'.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
The point is that a speaker at a national conservative conference spoke about this. If the majority of conservatives don't hold this same opinion, then they would not have invited him.
I attend lots of conferences where they have speakers with varying viewpoints, sometimes on the same panel. The conference doesn't endorse one speaker or another just because they invite them.
The conference invites speakers whom they think the majority of their attendees want to hear from. Do you think they invited a liberal to present a different view about this?
You are trying really hard to distance your party from him, but it's too late. This is absolutely the direction of the R party. The R party is turned hard right.
too late for what?