Friday, March 9, 2012

Thought police at Univ. Rochester

From University of Rochester (NY) Professor Stephen E. Landsburg, a blisteringly refreshing view of Sandra Fluke, Rush to Judgment (via Althouse h/t Instapundit):

But while Ms. Fluke herself deserves the same basic respect we owe to any human being, her position — which is what’s at issue here — deserves none whatseover. It deserves only to be ridiculed, mocked and jeered. To treat it with respect would be a travesty. I expect there are respectable arguments for subsidizing contraception (though I am skeptical that there are arguments sufficiently respectable to win me over), but Ms. Fluke made no such argument. All she said, in effect, was that she and others want contraception and they don’t want to pay for it….

But whether or not he chose the right word, what I just don’t get is why the pro-respect crowd is aiming all its fire at Rush. Which is more disrespectful — his harsh language or Sandra Fluke’s attempt to pick your pocket? That seems like a pretty clear call to me.

Ooooohhhhh! Must be rebuked at the highest levels, via Althouse’s post:

Joel Seligman, president of the University of Rochester, issuing a statement:

MORE

No comments:

Post a Comment