This list is primarily a vehicle for academic self-promotion so drop the sanctimony Volokh...
---Jimmy green On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 7:27 PM, jim green <ugala...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is this the same Eugene Volokh who is obsessed with gay men converting > him? The same one who supported ex-gay conversion therapy? The same one > who claimed gay sex was inherently dangerous? > > A stroll through your blog is a case study of a closet case... > > ---Jimmy Green > > > On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 7:24 PM, jim green <ugala...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I see Horowitz is fast out of the gate defending Laycock as usual. I >> have responded ad nauseum to you in your comments section of your blog but >> as usual you deflect with a slew of questions as if I were your student in >> some parody of The Paper Chase... >> >> Ask me a serious question and I'll give you an answer but I'm not going >> to be bullied by some 2nd tier law professor... >> >> ---Jimmy Green >> >> >> On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Paul Horwitz <phorw...@hotmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Could you be more specific? What is it you suppose Prof. Laycock to have >>> done that puts him in the same company as Regnerus? Are you suggesting that >>> his work fails academic standards? That any relevant work as counsel was >>> subject to different standards than those that apply to other lawyers? If >>> so, how would you apply it to the hundreds of other cases of academic >>> lawyers who also work as advocates? Do you see any potential problems with >>> requests for the compelled disclosure of emails by university professors? >>> Did you see any problems when similar issues came up recently in North >>> Carolina, Michigan, Virginia, and elsewhere? Did you see any problems with >>> the compelled disclosure of information, records, testimony, associations, >>> and other matters with respect to university professors in the 1950s, at >>> both the state and federal level? In thinking about these questions, do you >>> not see any potential problems of general application? Or do you just look >>> at them case by case? And if the latter, how do you distinguish among them? >>> Surely not on the basis of what you think about the morality of the >>> individual, or the individual argument, involved. What is the bravery >>> involved? The students making the request, and the group supporting them, >>> said that they were in no way attempting to interfere with academic >>> freedom. I take it then that you agree that using freedom of information >>> requests to compel the disclosure of emails by university professors raises >>> no questions of academic freedom. Or do you think that, sometimes, it just >>> might? >>> >>> For what it's worth, I agree with you that this story deserves >>> attention. But perhaps not for the same reasons that you do. >>> >>> Respectfully, >>> >>> Paul Horwitz >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On May 25, 2014, at 5:42 PM, jim green <ugala...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Too bad it took a few brave college students to do what "responsible >>> academics" (including many on this list) have failed to do for years... >>> >>> >>> http://www.timesdispatch.com/news/latest-news-ap/lgbt-activists-take-u-va-professor-to-task-for-stance/article_fa5680ce-e36e-11e3-a4ed-0017a43b2370.html >>> >>> >>> - >>> --Jimmy Green >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see >>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw >>> >>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as >>> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are >>> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or >>> wrongly) forward the messages to others. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu >>> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see >>> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw >>> >>> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as >>> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are >>> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or >>> wrongly) forward the messages to others. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> *---jwg* >> > > > > -- > > *---jwg* > -- *---jwg*
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
