That institution is already laden with special and different treatment. Suspension of the basic constitutional rights for members is one that leaps to mind (substituted for the CMJ).
I don't think that it should necessarily be given carte blanche, but I don't think this particular rule is too burdensome. It SHOULD be in the realm of the Congress to make such decisions. They did not write a law that said that you couldn't forbid them from campus. That would probably have been found to be unconstitutional. They did write a law that said if you forbid them from recruiting on campus, you can't have free money. This control of the purse strings is exactly what Congress is supposed to do. It is a pretty big stick when wielded against unarmed academics, but a legal stick (in my mind, and according to the SC) But even with that said, we are not giving "any institution" special treatment. We are giving "THIS institution" special treatment. If any group in America has earned the right, they have. And if I could choose any institution to get first crack at the cream of our universities crop (above corporate recruiters), it would be them. On 3/7/06, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I disagree, if we give any institution special treatment beyond what > should be considered normal, its fast considered an entitlement, then > a right. Then a special right to impose its rule on the rest of > society. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:199223 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
