Since that last article was poorly written and gave little to fisk, I’m gonna tackle a letter to the editor and fisk it too.
I was highly disappointed by Rob Siegel’s ‘04 article, ” Games resume with America at war,” in the April 8 issue of the Justice. By politicizing the war, through ribbons, flags and pro-war commentary, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), in my view, has warranted criticism.
This guy again, I took him to task over his last letter. Let me dig up the permalink somewhere later. (Sorry, I’m lazy now)
The athletes who have taken a stand against the war, including fellow American Steve Nash of the NBA, are simply using their first amendment rights to freedom of speech in honor of the noble value of peace on earth.
Sure, they can do their thing, and the crowd has every right to boo him. Free speech is a two way street. And we all want peace.
For Geno Auriemma to come out and say that he’d throw any player off the team who expressed dissenting views goes against every principle of the university of which he is an employee and supposed educator.
[Note: Auriemma is the coach of UCONN’s champion women’s hoops team]. He has a right to express his opinion too and to request that his players act in a dignifed manner. But let us look at the real remarks:
“We’ve given people the right to disrespect what this country stands for,” Auriemma told The Courant after UConn’s victory over Notre Dame on Sunday at Gampel Pavilion.
“The flag is a symbol of what we stand for,” he added. “Anybody who does (what Smith has done), they have the right to do it, but to me it’s disrespectful and, as a coach, I would have that right not to have that person on the team. Then they can sue me and say, `You’re denying me my rights.’ “
Auriemma also told the newspaper that he would allow Smith to protest a possible war with Iraq or inequalities in the American system.
Anyone have any problems with what the coach said? He’s an employee of the university–so doesn’t he have a right to do that under “academic freedom”
The goal of a university is to foster a spirit of critical thinking
Is the Liberal definition of Critical thinking to bash all conservatives? to bash the US?
which is in no way unpatriotic, but rather challenges prevailing social norms and assumptions for the ultimate benefit of society
True, it’s not unpatriotic often, but what about social norms that work and that most people like? Huh? This sounds like a call for a communist revolution if you ask me.
It should engender constructive criticism of policies - such as the war against Iraq - which could be considered unjust.
Fair enough, we can be critical–but criticism can’t only be a one way street. There can be criticism against liberals (and liberal ideas) too. And the war isn’t unjust…can’t you people leave it alone already?
Auriemma, in my view, should be reprimanded for his comments and efforts to stifle independent inquiry and dissent among his players
No, he shouldn’t. He didn’t stiffle inquiry by his players–rather he jusrt said that he has expectations for htem when they are in uniform representing their school and team. They have a right to have any opinions that they want, he just wants them to put these aside as they go onto the basketball court–where the focus should be hoops.
As a university student, Siegel should be ashamed for subverting the very ideals and values which his parents are paying for him to learn
Woah! Calm down there buddy. I don’t know Siegel, but what if he likes the norms? How is he subverting these “ideals and values”?- is it because he doesn’t agree with you that he should be ashamed? That’s very petty argument to say the least. What about the “free exchange of ideas” that take place at a university–remember that thing???
allowing blind patriotism to blur his open-mindedness towards dissenting views and concern for the victims of U.S. foreign policy.
What blind patriotism? What if he’s got a grasp on his patriotism—and sees it clearly…huh? He may also very well be open minded, even though he doesn’t agree with you. All of your arguments seem to be working like a boomerang, being thrown out then just returning straight back at you.
And what if Siegel supports US foriegn policy? Huh? And who are the victims you speak of–the Anti-war movement? The people who died because we delayed in taking action?
Perhaps you (letter writer) should take off your blinders and realize that not everyone agrees with you, and that they have the same rights as you to express their opinions, thank you very much.