Despiden a un profesor de la Universidad de Illinois en Urbana-Champaign

Por debatir la homosexualidad desde una perspectiva católica en la materia “Introducción al Catolicismo”.

Aparentemente un amigo de unos de los alumnos se sintió ofendido de que se diga que la homosexualidad viola las leyes naturales y lo acusó de fomentar el “lenguaje inflamatorio”.

Quiero creer que alguien que se inscribe a un curso con el título de “Introducción al Catolicismo” entiende desde el vamos que la idea es familiarizarse con los puntos de vista de la religión católica.

Si una universidad pierde la libertad de tocar ciertos temas para evitar que alguien se sienta ofendido, ¿qué le queda?

In dismissing Howell, the University of Illinois expressed a solidifying public opinion that a critical view of homosexual behavior is indefensible. It was the opinion expressed by the student who filed the original complaint against Howell: “Teaching a student about the tenets of a religion is one thing, declaring that homosexual acts violate the natural laws of man is another.” The student was not criticizing the logic of Howell’s arguments; he was criticizing Howell’s audacity in suggesting the possibility of an argument based on naturally knowable reasons that homosexual conduct is wrong. That there can be no such argument is clear from the widely supposed fact that homosexual acts are not wrong; in other words, you, the purveyor of such an argument, must be wrong because I am right. And because there can be no argument based on natural reason, anyone who tries to make such an argument must be motivated by “hate.”

(Gracias, Julio)