Posted by David Bernstein:
So Much for Academic Freedom:
http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_07_12-2009_07_18.shtml#1247517074
[1]Inside Higher Ed has a story about the ongoing controversy over
Thio Li-ann of the National University of Singapore, who will be
teaching International Human Rights at NYU as a visitor this Fall. As
IHE report, she is an "outspoken opponent of gay rights. Thio has
argued repeatedly and graphically that her country should continue to
criminalize gay sexual acts."
Cary Nelson, national president of the American Association of
University Professors, said that he would not advise NYU to rescind
the invitation to Thio to teach there. But he said that it would be
legitimate to raise questions about whether she should be teaching
human rights.
"Academic freedom protects you from retaliation for your extramural
remarks, but it does not protect you from being prohibited from
teaching in an area where you are not professionally competent, and
there are doubts on whether she has the competency in human
rights," Nelson said. He said that there is in fact an
"international consensus, save a few countries like Iran" that gay
people should not be treated as criminals.
What a bizarre and disturbing comment to come from the AAUP president,
whose professional obligation is to be a spokesperson for academic
freedom! He's suggesting that if a professor disagrees with the
"international consensus" on a particular narrow issue within a much
broader field, that professor should be deemed incompetent to teach in
that field.
By this logic, just for example, a professor who has that Israeli
settlements in the West Bank are legal under international (such as
the late Yale Law School professor Eugene Rostow) law would not be
permitted to teach international law; a professor who doubts that
human activities are playing a significant role in global climate
change would not be permitted to teach international environmental
law, among other things; and a professor who disagrees with various
national constitutions and international conventions guaranteeing
"positive rights" (to shelter, food, jobs, etc.) could be deemed on
that basis incompetent to teach a range of related subjects. This
principle would extend beyond international law. Perhaps feminist
professors who think that all heterosexual sex amounts to rape should
be banned from teaching classes on gender-related issues, given that
this is strongly contrary to international consensus. And all this
regardless, apparently, of how these issues are treated in the
classroom, including whether the professor acknowledges that his
positions are a minority in the field, or, for that matter, whether
the professor discusses his own positions in class at all, or just
teaches the current status of the debate and the law.
Most likely, what Nelson is really thinking is that Tho is a bigot,
but since he can't come out and say that bigots shouldn't be allowed
to teach (because the next thing you know, the logic will be extended
to Communists and other left-wing radicals), he instead pretends that
the argument is over Tho's "competency."
I think it much more honest and appropriate to keep the debate honest:
is the fact that someone thinks that homosexual acts are immoral and
perverse, and should be illegal (at least in her home country)
sufficient grounds to disinvite her (or not invite her to begin with)
to teach in her subject area, assuming she otherwise has the relevant
expertise.
References
1. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/07/08/nyu
_______________________________________________
Volokh mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.powerblogs.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/volokh
