When a med school professor says that “anyone who voted for George Bush is an idiot”, we’ve now stepped well outside acceptable behavior. If you didn’t notice, I wrote about harassment and intimidation in the classroom, not the free flow of ideas. What do you think I meant when I put this section into the article:

Students also expressed concern that the intolerant atmosphere engendered by the faculty and permitted by the administration has emboldened fellow liberal students to follow suit and partake in similar acts of aggressive and disrespectful behavior thereby further exacerbating the problem and creating a divide between the student body.

Furthermore, I definitely don’t agree that “EVERYONE needs to do some work here.” That’s a lame rationalization if ever I heard one. The reality is that the students that attended that conference have voiced serious fears of retribution because of their political and religious beliefs.

Something else that must be considered in all this is that these professors’ hostility isn’t just a difference of opinion. Their behavior sounds much like how the Fever Swampers act. Based on what these students said in the conference, I’d say that all of the changes needing to be made must come from the professors.

As for the McCarthy line, let’s be serious. You say that “Perhaps, rather than going on a firing spree or subjecting professors to McCarthy-era keep your beliefs to yourself mentality, what students, administrators, and professors could work on is better communication and more open forums.” That’s nonsense. Going on Bush-hating diatribes has nothing to do with med school. It’s a professor expressing his/her hatred. If they want to have those views and express them, then they must be done outside of a med school classroom.

Finally, these professors’ beliefs should be anchored in reality. Instead, they’re anchored in hatred and blind ideology. That’s hardly worthy of debate, especially at a university post-graduate school.

“After all, these students are the professors’ bosses because they, along with Iowa taxpayers, pay the teachers’ salaries.”

College is a place for people to come into contact with opinions, ideas, and subjects that are new and, yes, even controversial. This is the grown up world. These things exist. This does not mean that students should sit, dumbly agreeing with or taking others’ opinions as their own. Ah, ha. Learning, listening, synthesizing, and then making critical judgment on issues. Yes, this is what college students do.

There is such a thing as academic freedom, and you need to look into what that means to better educate yourself in this area. Professors, like anyone else, are entitled to their political, religious, or societal opinions, and they can even discuss them in class. This does not detract from students rights, and it could even be relevant to the class work. Now, if the professor name calls, demeans, or punishes a student for the student’s beliefs or because a student disagrees with the professor, then there is conflict with rights of students. Should professors try to convert people? No, that’s not the course objective. Should professors get people thinking about issues relevant to class subjects? Yes, even if all students do not agree. Should professors discuss politics in a math course? Here’s where the line gets drawn. Professors should devote class time to meeting the course objectives. Most do, and some don’t.

Professors, for the most part, do teach subjects, and the idea that they are ALL liberal or all brainwashers is a sweeping generalization. The same would be true to argue that, based on a couple incidences, all professors are conservative Christians trying to convert students. You need to better qualify your claims. There are many individuals out there, professing, and some do make comments that are offensive or that proselytize (and they can be liberals or conservatives or those mostly unheard of libertarians, like the South Park people). And, actually, there are students, again of all varieties, who like to take political, religious, etc, grandstands in class, too. Again, these can be relevant to class and they could be something good to hear so that we all have better ideas about how others are thinking and making decisions.

Perhaps, rather than going on a firing spree or subjecting professors to McCarthy-era keep your beliefs to yourself mentality, what students, administrators, and professors could work on is better communication and more open forums. In the university culture, especially with first and second year students who are very much dualistic and then very much multiplistic (check out Perry’s Model of Cognitive Development), it is hard for them to realize that there is give and take. That the answers from authority are not always correct. Or, that the answers from a “liberal” are, automatically, not correct. Midwestern students are notoriously passive this way—a cultural thing and documented. Professors can also be very proud people who don’t always listen to a student’s view point. EVERYONE needs to do some work here.

Profs who take the tack that they are free to express their opinions anywhere, anytime, should be allowed to do so but not at taxpayers’ expense. They should either teach their subjects or move to private campuses (campi?) and indoctrinate from that position. While they are in the employ of the taxpayer, they should respect the will of the people to teach, not indoctrinate.

It’s almost an attitude that one finds with the NIMBY crowd: I’ve got mine, and no one else will be allowed to participate. For advocating openess, libs sure have a problem with disagreement.