<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d11969108\x26blogName\x3dCambridge+Common\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://cambridgecommon.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://cambridgecommon.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-4528793327087001496', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

The price of HLS's principles?

400 million dollars a year. An excellent article by the Crimson about the Law School letting the Pentagon on campus (despite "don't ask, don't tell" violating it's anti-discrimination policy) so that they could keep their yearly grants from the federal government. Any thoughts?

9 Comments:

At 2:29 AM, Blogger Latigo Flint said...

I shudder to think what I'd sell away for 400 million dollars. (Everyone has their price... mine just happens to be significantly lower than most.)

 
At 9:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Note that this price tag wouldn't be paid by the law school alone, but by ALL OF HARVARD. So it's not 'their' (the Law School's) grants, but 'the UNIVERSITY'S.'

I expect there'd be some organic chemists pretty upset if the government decided to turn off the tap in order to send a message to us eggheads.


Jim

 
At 9:11 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, the point wasn't just that the organic chemists would be upset but that they'd be upset not to have had a voice in this decision. The law school dean just doesn't have the authority to make choices that effect all disciplines liks this....

J

 
At 9:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

AFFECT, not EFFECT. Sheesh, where's my brain today?

 
At 2:17 PM, Blogger andrew golis said...

Lambda's treasurer: “Many in the group think this really makes us feel like second-class citizens,” said. “If we were a [racial or ethnic] minority, this wouldn’t be the policy of the school.”

The question then, is do we put the same weight on sexual identity, and the violation of one's freedom to express it and live as you would, as we do on racial or ethnic identity and the discrimination that may result from that? Is it the same, different, better or worse to tell a gay person they must hide their sexuality (something which, if straight people really thought about they'de realize is a HUGE part of their personalities, way of speaking, acting, etc.) than it would be to exclude a racial minority or tell them they must conform to certain white standards?

 
At 2:17 PM, Blogger andrew golis said...

note: because if it is as bad (and I believe it is), then you have to ask: if the Pentagon where openly racist, would HLS let them recruit?

 
At 10:58 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, it is the same.

And yes, HLS would let them recruit. You can't fight city hall.

400 million smackers! That's a lot of brain breaks.

 
At 3:26 PM, Anonymous Dan Svirsky said...

It'll be interesting to see what comes of the brief that the 40 people on HLS staff filed to the Supreme Court. They said (I think) that something would come in December?

It'll be an interesting test for Roberts and O'Connor's replacement, if SCOTUS does make a decision.

 
At 10:19 AM, Blogger C. G. said...

I think it's pretty clear that at least in some way (see the Cambridge Common posting on ROTC recruiting) the Pentagon is racist. Happily, we're taking note of that as well.

Incidentally, oral argument for the Solomon Amendment case (on cert from the 3rd Cir. who ruled it unconstitutional) will be on Dec. 6.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home