Granted, its' a sneaky, back-door censorship, but we're talking about "conservatives" here.
The rationales offered are what might be expected:
He made a point, alright, but it had nothing to do with responsibility. As if he knows what the word means. And I'd like to ask Rep. Smith, responsibility by what standard. Seems to me the universities were doing their job, which is to educate students. That necessarily involves exposing them to new ideas and new viewpoints. That's what education is, after all.
This one's choice:
Um -- who is it who's trying to censor the curriculum? I think Rep. Nanney's viewpoint is coming through loud and clear.
It always astonishes me that a group that touts being "real Americans" consistently comes up with attempts to subvert the entire American system.
Via Towleroad.
The South Carolina House refused Monday to back down from plans to punish two public colleges in the budget for assigning freshmen to read books dealing with homosexuality.
The House rejected multiple attempts to restore $52,000 cut from the College of Charleston in the state budget, and $17,142 cut from the University of South Carolina Upstate. Those are the amounts the universities spent on books assigned to their incoming freshmen last summer. The efforts failed by votes of 69-41, 70-43, 71-40 and 71-38.
Opponents argued the cuts, which reduce what the colleges can spend from their own revenue sources, censor and micromanage college decisions.
When it comes to public colleges, legislators should be debating funding and building construction, not "pushing our own moral agenda on these institutions of higher learning," said Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, D-Orangeburg.
The rationales offered are what might be expected:
Rep. Garry Smith, whose subcommittee made the reductions, said he wanted to make a point after college officials declined to give students an option to read something else. He said he wouldn't oppose the books if they were part of an elective course. He called it promotion of a lifestyle.
"Freedom comes with responsibility. These universities did not act responsibly," said Smith, R-Simpsonville.
He made a point, alright, but it had nothing to do with responsibility. As if he knows what the word means. And I'd like to ask Rep. Smith, responsibility by what standard. Seems to me the universities were doing their job, which is to educate students. That necessarily involves exposing them to new ideas and new viewpoints. That's what education is, after all.
This one's choice:
Rep. Wendy Nanney, R-Greenville, said opponents of the cuts argue for a diversity of ideas but don't want to consider conservatives' viewpoint.
Um -- who is it who's trying to censor the curriculum? I think Rep. Nanney's viewpoint is coming through loud and clear.
It always astonishes me that a group that touts being "real Americans" consistently comes up with attempts to subvert the entire American system.
Via Towleroad.
No comments:
Post a Comment