More UIUC Anti-Catholic Bigotry

[Martin Eisenstadt]

University of Illinois Instructor Fired Over Catholic Beliefs

Quote:Published July 09, 2010 | Associated Press

URBANA, Ill. -- The University of Illinois has fired an adjunct professor who taught courses on Catholicism after a student accused the instructor of engaging in hate speech by saying he agrees with the church's teaching that homosexual sex is immoral. ...

Ill. prof. fired for teaching about Catholic beliefs in class on Catholicism

Quote:Monday, July 12, 2010, 12:00 AM (MST)

CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys sent a letter Monday to University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign officials on behalf of a popular, highly regarded professor who was fired for explaining the position of the Roman Catholic Church on human sexual behavior to members of his Introduction to Catholicism class.

“A university cannot censor professors’ speech--including classroom speech related to the topic of the class--merely because certain ideas ‘offend’ an anonymous student,” said ADF Senior Counsel David French. “To fire a professor for teaching the actual subject matter of his course is outrageous. It’s ridiculous that a school would fire a professor without even giving him a chance to defend himself when he simply taught Catholic beliefs in a class about Catholic beliefs.” ...

ADF attorneys see Howell’s case as part of an ominous trend on campus. Mike Adams’ ongoing suit against officials from the University of North Carolina, Wilmington, and June Sheldon’s lawsuit against officials from San Jose City College demonstrate that professors can be punished for merely expressing their viewpoint, and now, for even teaching the very material that is the subject of a class.

Long timers on these discussion boards are probably not the least bit surprised to read about new allegations of anti-Catholic bigotry at George Gollin's employer, U of Illinois.  His wife, Melanie Loots, was at the center of a similar controversy back in 2005:

Quote:UIUC Administrator Slurs Catholics

Ruth Watkins    View profile   Jul 19 2005, 10:05 am

A University of Illinois administrator has used the term "Papists" to publicly slur the Roman Catholic religion, and has belittled its religious customs as "dirty."

Melanie J. Loots, UIUC's Associate Vice Chancellor for Research, has been quoted in public internet documents belittling Catholicism and insulting its rites and customs. Loots is the wife of radical socialist UIUC professor George Gollin-Loots, best known for his vicious public criticisms of the Bush administration.

The offensive statements were included in documents posted on the internet by the Loots' daughter, Cordelia Rose Loots, who attends University Laboratory High School, a remedial institution located on the Urbana-Champagne campus. (http://themagnetwomanprophecies.blogspot.com/)

The revelations of public use of the religious slur "Papists" by a public university administrator have shocked Roman Catholics throughout the world. Why does UIUC allow administrators and faculty to attack Catholics and Catholicism with impunity?

Is there a double standard at UIUC? And if so, for whom? Shouldn't, e.g., Jews, socialists, and lesbians be held to the same standards of conduct as everyone else? Why is the university administration singling out Catholics for these vicious, hateful slurs?

Roman Catholics are demanding that University President B. Joseph White, UIUC Chancellor Richard H. Herman, the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois, and the Illinois Attorney General, investigate these hateful acts and words, and take appropriate action against the people responsible. Roman Catholics believe they should be free to attend this public, tax-supported institution without fear of cruel, bigoted attacks, and particularly not by university administrators or faculty, individually or acting in concert.

This is how it works at UIUC.  Merely mentioning 2,000 year old religious teachings is hate speech, but bigots like UIUC administrator Loots can insult Catholics as "Papists" and denigrate their sacred rituals as "dirty" with impunity.  

Even if Dr. Kenneth Howell is reinstated, how will the anti-Catholic bigotry at UIUC ever be put to an end unless bigots like George Gollin and Melanie Loots are fired?  

[RespectableGent]

Dr. Kenneth Howell teaches Catholicism because he has an interest in Catholicism. Who'da thought that a professor would have an interest in his subject?

I'm not sure why he was fired over expressing his personal and professional belief that homosexual acts are dirty. The official Catholic stance is that homosexuals are dirty. No problem there.

Matter of fact, I am also of the opinion that man-on-man hairy anus interactions are not particularly pleasing.

What does George Gollin think about having sexual encounters with big n' burly men?

Yay? Nay? Maybe UIUC can give him the boot as well.

[Yancy Derringer]

RespectableGent Wrote:What does George Gollin think about having sexual encounters with big n' burly men?

A federal judge ruled that Oregon homosexual Alan Contreras was an anti-Christian bigot and civil rights violator.  Most people would wait on line overnight just for a chance to kick the shit out of a scumbag like Contreras.  Gollin sends him all his “research” and “collaborates” with him on articles.  That should tell you exactly what Gollin’s attitude is about anti-Christian bigots, civil rights violators and man-on-man sex.

The Loots/Gollin clan sacrificed their one and only breeding experiment on the altar of perversion and political correctness, all to advance their own academic careers.  If anyone doubts their full commitment to the party line, all they have to do is look at the disgusting little foul-mouthed dyke they raised.  Remember, it may take a village to raise a child, but it takes two PhD’s to raise a radical lesbian cheerleader.  

So of course the Double Dr. Dumbass Family wouldn’t dare oppose the homosexual political agenda.  If the Catholic Church fights it, well that’s just too bad for what they like to call the “dirty papists.”  At UIUC it’s not only safer to be on the side of sodomy than spirituality, it’s a smart career move too.  As we've seen with Howell, any prof at UIUC who isn’t taking it in the ass runs the risk of getting fired.  If there ever was somebody who should be fired it’s Gollin, so if he still has a job I guess we know why.

[Herbert Spencer]

Howell lawyers up, throws down!  Tells UIUC: reinstate or get sued!  George Gollin says nothing!  

Will UIUC's entrenched, institutional anti-Catholic bigotry be costing Illinois taxpayers more money in lawyers and expensive settlements????

Quote:The University continues to violate Dr. Howell's First and Fourteenth Amendment rights each day this situation goes uncorrected and he need not await the decision of the Committee before redressing his grievances in court....Thus, absent written assurance that Dr. Howell will continue to teach his regularly assigned courses in the fall of 2010, he will proceed to litigation.  Please respond to me in writing by July 27, 2010 that the University reinstated Dr. Howell's teaching assignments for the fall of 2010.

http://www.speakupmovement.org/content/p...Veazie.pdf

[Armando Ramos]

Quote:ADF attorneys see Howell’s case as part of an ominous trend on campus. ...June Sheldon’s lawsuit against officials from San Jose City College demonstrate that professors can be punished for merely expressing their viewpoint, and now, for even teaching the very material that is the subject of a class.

June Sheldon's similar lawsuit just settled after a federal judge ruled that “a teacher’s instructional speech is protected by the First Amendment.”  She will receive $100,000 and the termination will be removed from her record.  I would expect something similar in the Howell case, although the UIUC bigots are probably just bonehead enough to parlay this into much more than $100,000.

Quote:Fired Calif. professor exonerated in settlement of lawsuit against San Jose college district

Case settles after court affirms teachers’ First Amendment rights in the classroom
Thursday, July 22, 2010, 12:00 AM (MST) |

SAN JOSE, Calif. — Alliance Defense Fund attorneys have reached a settlement with the San Jose/Evergreen Community College District in a lawsuit filed on behalf of a biology professor. Professor June Sheldon was fired after objectively answering a student’s in-class question simply because a different student claimed to be “offended” by her answer, even though it comported with the official class curriculum and a district policy on academic freedom.

ADF attorneys agreed to dismiss the suit because the district has agreed to remove Sheldon’s termination from her record and pay her $100,000 for lost work. The district argued that its professors have no free speech rights in the classroom, but a federal court rejected that argument and determined that “a teacher’s instructional speech is protected by the First Amendment.” Sheldon is now teaching at a different college.

“Professors shouldn’t be fired simply for doing their jobs as educators. Professionally addressing both sides of an academic issue according to the class curriculum is not grounds for dismissal; it’s what a professor is supposed to do,” said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel David J. Hacker. “This is a favorable settlement for Ms. Sheldon, but we remain concerned, for the sake of all faculty members, about the district’s view of academic freedom, as expressed in court, in contradiction to its policy.”

Sheldon, an experienced adjunct professor who taught a human heredity course at San Jose City College, answered a student’s inquiry in June 2007 about how heredity affects homosexual behavior. She briefly introduced positions on both sides of the issue that was to be explored in a later class. In her response, she cited the class textbook, as well as the research of a well-known German scientist referred to by a website provided in the textbook, explaining that the issue is currently being debated in the scientific community. The school launched an investigation after a different student lodged an informal complaint that deemed Sheldon’s comments “offensive and unscientific.” Sheldon was recommended for removal from the adjunct seniority rehire preference list and terminated by the district’s board of trustees in February 2008.

The district’s “Academic Freedom” policy states, “The common good depends on the free search for truth and its free expression; to this end, faculty and students hold the right of full freedom of inquiry and expression. Academic freedom is essential to these purposes and applies to both teaching and research. Freedom is fundamental to the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of the student in learning.... The instructor has the right to study and investigate, interpret his/her findings and express resulting conclusions to students.... Because human knowledge is limited and changeable, the instructor may present views which are controversial and evaluate opinions held by others while simultaneously respecting and valuing their right of their free expression.”

At the same time, the district argued in a brief that Sheldon “is an employee and does not have a First Amendment cause of action for the Defendants’ regulation of her in-class speech” and that the district “must be able to control the in class conduct and speech of those teachers.”

ADF attorneys filed the lawsuit Sheldon v. Dhillon in June 2008 with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. Kevin Snider and Matt McReynolds of Pacific Justice Institute, two of nearly 1,800 attorneys in the ADF alliance, also represented Sheldon in the suit.

[Ben Johnson]

Getting stomped by the jackboots of fascists has to be worth more than $100,000. How else are we to convince them to stop hating Catholics? By making them bleed where it hurts most - in the pocketbook. I think getting his job back, a million bucks, and an apology from the directors of the school delivered while prostrate should be adequate. You have to stop these bigots somehow.

[Albert Hidel]

First Amendment Wrote: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.

There's a reason why this was the FIRST Amendment and not the 17th or 23rd.  America's founders understood the importance of the rights of religion and free speech.  You are right Ben, $100,000 hardly seems like enough for the loss of these vital liberties.  

I'd also like to see individual liability imposed on the government slugs who deny people their essential freedoms, rather than just letting them hide behind governmental immunity and forcing the taxpayers to foot the bill.  

That's why God created E&O insurance.  Egregious repeat offenders like Contreras and certain UIUC admins would be uninsurable and hence unemployable, and we all would be better off.

[Ben Johnson]

Where are all the Catholic Wops, Paddies, and Polacks in Chicago and why aren't they going to war over this? Nothing I hate worse than bigotry.

[Ben Johnson]

Maybe there could be a Million Papist March on UC but judging where they put it in the backwoods you're more likely to get a million chickens or goats.