Conservative Warriors and Homosexuality

Where is the line? What can conservatives say about homosexuality that won’t be considered bigotry? The case of Professor John McAdams has lit up the conservative intellectual world with its implications for the eroding respectability of conservative opposition to gay rights and the utterly transformed intellectual environment on US college campuses.

Let’s start with a few caveats. First, full disclosure: I taught one semester at Marquette University, Professor McAdams’s school. I also taught for several years down the street at Marquette High School, which is no longer directly connected to the university. I feel an abiding love for both institutions. More important, I am unapologetically biased in this case. I believe it is legitimate and important to regulate speech in public (and some private) forums, including college classrooms. Hard as it is to hear, some ideas do not deserve to be granted equal status with others. Ideas that dehumanize classes of people are not just as good as other ideas. For instance, if a student in a seminar wants to insist that no white people can possibly understand US history because they are by definition part of an exploitative class, such talk should be ruled out of bounds. It would tend to exclude an entire class of people simply because of their cultural identity. Similarly, if a student wanted to rule that homosexuals were incapable of being moral in their relationships, or that women cannot understand certain concepts, or that non-citizens have no right to be heard in political discussions, such talk should be out of bounds.

Of course, many conservative intellectuals share that basic framework, but they disagree bitterly that traditionalist notions about homosexuality constitute that same sort of exclusionary mentality. In other words, many conservative thinkers agree that public speech shouldn’t be racist or chauvinist, but they disagree that conservative ideas about homosexuality fall into that same category.

The steamroller drive of homosexual rights in recent months and years has put some traditionalist conservatives on edge. A few recent cases have raised hackles among many conservative thinkers. At Mozilla and Gordon College, to cite just two examples, conservative intellectuals attracted instant and furious retribution for statements that have been perceived as anti-gay. In each case, ideas that would have been unremarkable just a few years ago are now taken as beyond the pale of respectable public speech.

In the case of Professor McAdams, college politics and bureaucracy have added new wrinkles into the question of acceptable conservative opinion about homosexuality. In brief, McAdams has been suspended with pay and asked to stay away from campus. Why? He blogged about the statements of a teaching assistant. That TA had told a student that opposition to homosexual marriage would not be considered in a class on ethics. The student complained to Professor McAdams, and McAdams outed the TA on his blog.

As McAdams noted, his support for the student prompted furious condemnation by “leftist academics,” who “demanded our head on a pike.” A group of prominent faculty at Marquette published an open letter on the issue. McAdams’s actions, they write, constituted “harassment and intimidation” of the TA. Other members of the Marquette community, they write, altered their behavior to avoid similar attacks from McAdams.

In the end, McAdams has been suspended with pay. The Fox-News commentariat has had its chance to recoil in horror at the anti-conservative “inquisition.”

There is, of course, more at stake here than intellectual positions about homosexuality and gay rights. We also must consider faculty politics and the unfortunate ways academics learn to teach. How do teaching assistants learn to handle disagreement among students? When does a tenured professor have a duty not to attack publicly a non-degreed teaching assistant? How should faculty respond when a colleague behaves in ways they dislike?

At the center of all these questions, however, is the question of conservatism and homosexuality. Not too long ago, opposition to gay marriage was a common part of our mainstream political discussion. These days, in college seminars, newspapers, technology companies, and public policy, any conservative notion that homosexuals do not have the right to marry one another is often considered rank bigotry.

Is it possible for conservative intellectuals to oppose gay marriage without being branded bigots? Has that culture-war train left the station?

Advertisements
Leave a comment

2 Comments

  1. It was singularly inappropriate for McAdams to make a culture warrior attack against a TA in another department, based on the say-so of a student who disagreed with her. I’m guessing that was the reason for his suspension.

    If I were teaching an ethics class in the philosophy department, I would probably exclude discussions of homosexuality. But that’s because they can be a serious distraction. I take it that such a class is about theory of ethics, perhaps illustrated by examples. A hot emotional issue makes for a bad example.

    In the disputed issue, the TA may have handled it badly. I’d put that down to inexperience.

    Is discussion of this topic excluded on campus? I doubt it. The topic has certainly been discussed in mailing lists on our campus. I’m not sure what classes, if any, exist where it would be an appropriate topic for in-class discussion.

    If conservatives feel that they are being excluded, maybe they should look at recent court decisions — some of them by conservative judges. The decisions seem to be saying that the conservatives present a lot of rhetoric but fail to provide legitimate arguments that would warrant the conclusion they seek.

    Reply
  2. I don’t think that objection to gay marriage discussions is yet the standard practice of “liberal” academia. I do think that most instructors recognize that such conversations have to be handled very carefully and sensitively to avoid creating a hostile environment for gay or bisexual students. After all, just opposing gay marriage may not be hostile, but if students start talking about how gay people cannot experience “real” love and have inferior relationships or are unsafe around children, then the classroom would quickly become hostile. As such, I can entirely understand if an instructor would prefer not to discuss such things in class. When I took Argument Writing in a community college, my (not liberal) instructor had a list of certain topics that were not allowed to do our class discussion on, because they tended to be so emotionally charged (on both sides) that little actual learning would take place. Abortion was one of these topics… I don’t remember gay marriage being one of them, but that was 9-10 years ago. It probably would be off-limits by now.

    So this seems to be a clear case of McAdams wanting to drum up typical conservative paranoia about Christian “persecution” and doing so at the expense of a graduate student. In the email that he sent to the student, asking for her side (which he apparently only gave her 9 hours to respond to before publishing his blog post) he already stated that he was writing up a story about her conduct. It seems he heard the student’s complaint, immediately decided “hey, this is an awesome example of Christian persecution!” and then went ahead and interpreted it and published it without gathering the facts. The fact that he is not the least bit sorry, despite having effectively driven this TA out of the school, is utterly abhorrent. His ethics are terrible; he published an illegally-recorded conversation that a student provided without even contacting the TA for her side of the story or for to even make sure she had given permission to be recorded (she had not)! He is now taking the harassment and hate-mail that she has gotten and is happily spinning it as a persecution against HIM. I am glad that the college is responding by punishing McAdams, even if it is belatedly and inadequately. This professor is clearly the very bottom of the barrel in terms of academic integrity.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s