Another of America's bastions of open dialog for multiple viewpoints showed it's true colors yesterday. Some from this place of higher education, where professors hope to expose their students to various paradigms, attempted to disgrace their commencement speaker. In reality all they did was show their own hypocrisy.
Boston College, a catholic university, had the good fortune of having Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, present their commencement speech. The college even bestowed upon her an honorary doctorate.
The issue at hand is that there were 200 students and faculty that attempted to silence the Secretary of State. They petitioned the college encouraging it to not allow her to speak! These people who are all for "alternative viewpoints" tried to stop someone from sharing hers because it differed from there own. Can't get much more "tolerant" than that!
Once they learned that their hypocrisy was not going to be supported by institution, they decided to protest at the commencement exercises. They wore signs on their arms, backs, and mortar boards that said, "Not in my name." Signifying that they didn't agree with the presentation of an honorary degree. Of course, this is no more than a statement of the obvious. What good is an honorary degree from the students of Boston College? That would look good on a resume. "Why yes, the undergrads of Boston College gave me a Doctorate." What arrogance to think it is in their name! I'll be sure to list that right next to the "Nicest Smile" award I received from my high school senior class.
One of the reasons the protesters gave for not allowing her to speak was that the felt "Doing so contradicts the universityÂ’s Catholic, Jesuit, and humanistic identity." (From the letter sent to the administration, see comments for the whole letter.) Margery Eagan, a columnist from the Boston Globe asked a very interesting question: "Where were those students and faculty when, literally across the street, Bernard Cardinal Law was covering up the biggest child sex scandal in America?" Anyone? Anyone? Beuller?
The irony of this is that while these 200 people booed and turned their backs on the Secretary as she received her degree, they ended up facing the 30,000 people who were standing and cheering this modern day hero. (That's 0.6% of the attendees, in case you were wondering.) (I found this interesting: One of the protesters was Former Boston College professor Mary Daly, a feminist theologian who clashed with the college over her refusal to admit men to her classes. There's a "tolerant" person!)
Let's put this in perspective. I find the best way to do this is to alter a few details. Let's say this were a conservative university. (Do those really exist?) And they were protesting a democratic African American female secretary of state. What would the reaction be? Outrage. The labels used would include "Racists," "Bigots," Chauvinists," "Radicals," and "Fanatics." Why are these protesters not seen in the same light? Is it because it's fashionable to be a left wing nutcase, but not a right winger?
Ms. Rice had a few words of advice for the protesters (And, one hopes, for her administration): "The next time you absolutely sure that you are correct, find someone who disagrees with you."
I think that it is very appropriate to honor this African American woman who has worked very hard to get where she is, who is an independent thinker (as proven by the fact that she is has not been bullied into being part of the left by the people like "Rev." Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton), and who is one of the few upstanding people in politics. Good for you BC for not caving and for honoring this woman who truly deserves it.
All in all, though, it's just my opinion.
4 comments:
Here is a copy of the letter sent to the administration:
We, the undersigned members of the faculty at Boston College, strongly disagree with the decision of the university’s leadership to grant Condoleezza Rice an honorary Doctor of Laws degree and to invite her to address the 2006 commencement. On the levels of both moral principle and practical moral judgment, Secretary Rice’s approach to international affairs is in fundamental conflict with Boston College’s commitment to the values of the Catholic and Jesuit traditions and is inconsistent with the humanistic values that inspire the university’s work.
As a matter of moral principle, Rice maintains that U.S. foreign policy should be based on U.S. national interest and not on what she calls the interests of an “illusory international community.” This stands in disturbing contrast with the Catholic and humanistic conviction that all people are linked together in a single human family and that all nations in our interdependent world have a duty to protect “the common good of the entire human family.”
On the level of practical judgment, Rice has helped develop and implement the strategic policies that have guided the United States in the tragic war in Iraq. Pope John Paul II and the United States Catholic bishops opposed initiating this war on ethical grounds. We also believe the policies that have shaped the war’s ongoing conduct cannot be justified in light of the moral values of the Catholic tradition or the norms of international law.
For these reasons, we object to Boston College honoring Condoleezza Rice at its 2006 commencement. Doing so contradicts the university’s Catholic, Jesuit, and humanistic identity.
THANK YOU CONDI! YOU GO GIRL!
Me and all my dead relatives will vote for you if you run for president.
if you don't want to, that's okay. I heard the NFL Commissioner job you wanted is still open...
You said, "Another of America's bastions of open dialog for multiple viewpoints showed it's true colors yesterday." What did the school do? They invited her and didn't give into pressure form the students and faculty. It seems like the bastion of open dialog worked well and provide those with differences of opinion a platform to express multiple viewpoints.
breathe, breathe, breathe, and relax.
You are right, the student's don't speak for the school. but the faculty do! What message is this sending the students whose minds they are attempting to shape? "This person's opinion has no value because I disagree with her?" "This person deserves no honor because she made a mistake?" "I refuse to listen to anyone who is in that political party?"
What message do you garner from these "role models?"
Post a Comment