the_voidoid said:
i haven't read the glnd/smc mission statement so i can't make any assumptions about what agenda they're attempting to promote. if you know for a fact that they seek to promote homosexual union rather than acceptance of sexual orientation, than you win. however, if their goal is to promote better awareness and acceptance of people with a different sexual orientation, then i feel the university is out of line by not recognizing them like any other organization.
what about the 1997 "spirit of inclusion" letter from the university, whose "goal" is to "create an environment of mutual respect, hospitality and warmth in which none are strangers and all may flourish." this was offered in lieu of a non-discrimination clause for sexual orientation in the school's hiring process.
In all fairness, the explicit mission statement from either glnd/smc or OutreachND is something I haven't seen in some time. As for the 'spirit of inclusion,' I think that is fair from a legal standpoint. One should always be vague in official written wording, at least whenever it comes to anything binding. This is a basic principle of jurisprudence.
However, none of this addressed why I think ND is too liberal. Hence:
ND has stated that the promotion of anything contrary to what the Church teaches is not to be allowed. However, the annual 'Vagina Monologues,' which aggitates not only for homosexual eroticism, but also pedophilia and (participatory?) rape, will be shown in the coming month. Likewise, ND had fetal tissue research in the 80s. Recently, professors from the law school used their positions to promote the legality of abortion (Bradley), and an anti-semitic terrorist sympathiser was recently recommended for a position at the Kroc Institute (Ramadan). The theology department annually challenges the current status of celibacy and promotes the ordination of women in a regularly-scheduled conference. While abortion is oppositional to Church teaching, the Center for Women's Concerns has twice been found giving abortion materials to young girls (I know both the girls that brought them down both times). So too are the College Democrats given recognized status, though I also think the College Republicans should have their status revoked. Equally, the largest anti-Catholic rally in the nation, the annual Jehova's Witnesses convention, has been held in the JACC.
Further, the students are remarkably passive toward Christian orthodoxy and outreach. The time and effort I put into the Knights of Columbus, the Corvilla Home, the Women's Care Center, the South Bend Center for the Homeless, the Diocesen Eucharistic Conference, FoodShare, etc.; as well as the fund-rasing I did for the Mission and Catholic Charities, the statue I placed on campus and the Gospel in Bishop Jenkey's hands, etc. won me limited respect from other students. Further, it was the same ten people at that school that did everything, and I knew them all because of it. I think most people at ND are only interested in themselves.
Also, as for intellectual conservatism. I know of nobody who read basic modern philosophical classics by Richard Weaver, Lionel Trilling, Leo Strauss, or Eric Voegelin. There was the moral philosophy of Alasdair MacIntyre and Charles Taylor because of the Center for Ethics and Culture, but preeminent theologians like Stanley Hauerhaus-who were once on the faculty-were forced to other institutions like Duke. The faculty at ND are very much of the same mode of continental Leftism dominant in the Ivies, and only the philosophy department-where medievalism and Thomism are in place-differs in this capacity. But the law school also has the other Bradley, Rice, and the most singularly important professor at Notre Dame: John Finnis.
