Banned at BYU ... Not

I know you'd be interested in an BYU NewsNet editorial entitled "Academic Freedom." In a little friendly cross-town sniping, it teases the the U's student association about its decision to delay its planned "Banned at BYU" forum, which was intended to tease BYU about its perceived academic freedom issue. It will now be presented in October under a new title, "Academic Freedom at Religious Institutions."

What about academic freedom at state institutions? I remember when an anthropology prof at UC Berkeley was relieved of his teaching duties when he made some comment regarding racial comparisons — nope, can't talk about that here. I recall reading about a prof who came to BYU to do his research on the economics of water law and allocation because he was unable to publish that sort of work at the state-sponsored university in California where he previously worked. PC thinking carries a lot more weight than religious sensibilities in the overall academic environment. But we wouldn't want to examine that sort of problem, would we? Not at the U, it seems.

Oh, the forum was delayed "because they feared the event would hurt the university's ability to lobby the state Legislature for funding." Now there's a fine example of what really controls university discourse: Concern about funding!

Comments

[Clark Goble]

And realistically that's what's controlling most of the controversial decisions at BYU: funding from private donors.

[Mark Butler]

It seems to me that much of what goes by the name of academic liberty is actually a desire to have an unrestricted entitlement to the property of others. Is that the principle of a celestial society? Shouldn't academic research, like other public enterprises, ideally be funded by the principle of common consent?

[Mark Butler]

"according to the principle"