Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
05.13.2008 3:43 pm

Schlafly’s narrow focus on issues is the antithesis of a liberal arts education

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

I am stunned to learn that my alma mater is awarding an honorary degree to Phyllis Schlafly.  In light of her narrow focus on issues and processes that are the antithesis of the principles of liberal arts education, it seems very questionable to consider her eligible for this honor.  I am greatly disappointed that a higher education institution with the reputation that Washington University enjoys would move in this direction.  As a member of the 1958 50th Reunion class, I was considering attending the ceremony, but with the honoring of Mrs. Schlafly, attending this ceremony is not  something that I can do.  I was there when she was attacking the ERA and women’s rights, often with meanness and smugness that rejected all other viewpoints. I am still a witness as she continues her attack “crusade” which now includes among its targets the concept of global warming.  My heart is heavy as I am moved to raise questions concerning the process of how these honorary degree decisions are made and by whom.  As I study the list of the Board of Trustees, I can not imagine how they came to a unanimous decision regarding Mrs. Schlafly.  I think that the awarding of an honorary degree has to be seen by the public as an endorsement of the “accomplishments” of the individual.  Mrs. Schlafly has a right to her opinions, but Washington University has the right and the obligation to carefully consider whom they decide to honor.  It is unfortunate that the class of 2008 and the 50th reunion class of 1958 have to endure the pain of this situation when it could have been thoughtfully avoided if the University had upheld the principles of fairness and objective investigation that I was taught while there as an undergraduate.


Mary Hodge Brauninger

Creve Coeur

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 1 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
14 comments

Comments are closed.

Yep, the facists have taken over the asylums. No “free speech” on college campuses. “Free speech” may make thinking adults out of the students and not the left-wing, regurgitating hate mongers that currently reside there.

Who would have thought college campuses would become facist incubators?

— Tango Golf Sierra
10:02 am May 14th, 2008

Mike O’Day,
I think you are twisting Twain’s words. I hardly see where a closed mind like Schlafly’s would fit into either Twain’s quote or your thought it would broaden the horizons of these graduates.

— suzyjax
10:52 am May 14th, 2008

All that can be gleaned from the rantings of Mary Hodge Brauninger is that she is a self-absorbed elitist. She uses ‘I’ twelve times in her letter, she degrades the people that have a liberal arts education and twice she has to remind us that SHE is a member of the 1958 50th Reunion class. What a bore.

— MEG
12:40 pm May 14th, 2008

To be conservative, rational, traditional and realistic is not closed minded at all (actually I find the liberal type person to be the one who is truly closed minded).

I find that many liberals tend to label conservatives (traditionalist) as being closed minded all the time. Like I said, it is actually the other way around. I find that to convince a liberal to see reason on any issue is like talking to “a rock and telling it to move.” No matter how much you reason or yell at a rock, it simply will stay put.

Phyllis has been a beacon of light for sound moral values for years, but those who prefer a “looser” life style take offense because of the light that is shined upon them as a result of their choices. It is easy for a person to throw stones at those he/she disagrees with versus accepting the truth and reality of his/her choice to embrace and do things that are immoral, abnormal and simply wrong. Phyllis and others like her are a voice for sound reason in a society and world that has chosen a destructive course by seeking openly to embrace those things that should never be embraced (whether by choice or by law).

I find that most liberals cry “free speech” and so on, but only want it for themselves while seeking to pass laws to squash and silence those on the traditional conservative side. When this occurs on the grand scale through out America (its happening in small snippets already; look at Washington U’s decision and the response from the opposition) we all will one day come to understand how a nation, like America, found on sound principles and morals “falls and fades” into history to become a distant reminder of what once was…” Think about the ancient powers of old who have chosen to place a heal on there moral base for the sake of liberal destructive realities.”

There’s a price to pay when only liberals are honored and the voice of sound moral conservative reason is silenced. Take a look at how many students (ranging from 13 to 25) behave these days (…stripping there clothes off in public places at our universities, using epitaphs that are ungainly, disrespecting and dishonoring their parents due to poor behavior, destroying property and so on) just because they want their selfish needs met at the expense of others.

Explain to me how people like Phyllis Schlafly are no longer necessary? We need people like her to keep things real and to shed light on matters to help encourage our society to tread down a sensible path that builds up our nation’s future, rather than destroy it.

She is worth honoring in every way. There are many others as well……..

— -Dwayne
5:16 pm May 14th, 2008

Pages: « 1 [2] Show All