Monday, October 28, 2013

Hate Speech And (Non) Punishment...

Well, now, isn't this special?

State official slams University of Kansas for allowing prof suspended over NRA tweet to be back at work
A state official from Kansas criticized the University of Kansas’ decision to allow the professor suspended over a tweet that targeted the National Rifle Association after the Navy Yard shooting to be allowed to return the school.

"All they're doing is stalling, hoping that it will die down and everybody will forget about it," State Sen. Greg Smith, a Republican lawmaker, told The Kansas City Star. "He was way out of line, way outside anything that's covered by tenure, due process or anything else. As far as I’m concerned, it was hate speech."
The professor stated that he wanted the children of NRA members to be in the next shooting. He claims he was misunderstood. I fail to see how you can misconstrue "Next time, let it be YOUR sons and daughters". For this he was suspended from the university. Except:
Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little, from the school, issued a press release stating that Guth would be assigned to other duties. It also said he would take a planned sabbatical in the spring. His annual salary is $82,703, The Kansas City Star reported.
So, he says something filled with hate and he is rewarded by not having to carry a teaching course load? That sounds like he was rewarded for his comments, not punished. I mean, he doesn't make $350,000 a year like Elizabeth Warren, but $82K is nothing to sneeze at - especially if you don't have to actually teach.

Imagine the furor that would have ensued if someone from Bob Jones University made a similar comment about the ACLU? Think that story would be buried or only covered by one news outlet? And then if the university took the professor off active teaching but still continued to give him his entire salary? To me, that's like the opposite of punishment.

Other professors have come to Guth's defense, claiming that any punishment is tantamount to an abridgement of his First Amendment rights. Apparently no one teaches a class dealing with Irony at the University of Kansas, because it's rather hysterical that these teachers are so concerned about the First Amendment when their colleague wants my children to be killed because I support the Second Amendment.

I mean, expecting Ivory Tower eggheads to be consistent is a fool's errand, but they could at least phone it in...

That is all.


Old NFO said...

And they'll shove it under the rug as soon as the media has anothe... Squirrel...

Ed said...

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

If you accept what it written above as stating exactly what is written, then you also must accept the same for what preceded it:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Note that the Second Amendment does not specify the type or quality of arms, as the First Amendment does not specify the content of the speech.