Justice Alito Discusses The Dangers Of Anti-First Amendment Sentiment In Higher Education

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
"Discussing religious beliefs, he argued, has become especially dangerous.
“You can’t say that marriage is the union between one man and one woman,” he noted. “Until very recently, that’s what the vast majority of Americans thought. Now it’s considered bigotry.”

Alito didn’t mention sacramentality, just marriage. And certainly until very recently most Americans considered marriage to be between a man and a woman, not because of sacramentality, but as a matter of common sense. Indeed, Catholic marriage tribunals don’t even consider sacramentality, but only validity. Non-sacramental marriages can be valid, but same sex unions can’t be marriage, because they are not marital.

But Alito’s point was that what had been a common belief for centuries is now considered bigotry, and subject to sanctions.
 
Last edited:
There are many things that have been “common belief” for centuries which we no longer believe today, at least most of us do not. For example, women have commonly been treated as second-class citizens for centuries, including in the United States, and still are in parts of the world. Slavery was considered the norm for centuries. Gay people have been mistreated, to say the least, for centuries. Antisemitism has ruled for centuries. And so on. Common belief or common sense is not always the best barometer for people’s views and behaviors.
 
Pufi said:
What is that “danger”?
Click to expand...
My opinion is that Christian positions and beliefs were never really challenged so openly until recently. They had a position of not just popularity but also privilege. Losing that status isn’t comfortable nor tolerated very well. The more Christianity becomes a minor position, the more they will consider it persecution because it’s being treated like all other religions were treated in Christian majority areas. Are some going too far…yes. I agree some are. But most of the complaints aren’t persecuting Christians, they just aren’t privileged and tolerated like they used to be.

If the worst thing to be called is a bigot, then many people will have to learn to either defend it or shrug it off. It’s a new learning curve and it’s uncomfortable. Sometimes, it’s even true.
 
I agree with everything you have said here. However, I also agree that NO ONE should feel intimidated to speak their mind on the college campus, including conservative Christians, and that they are often intimidated. Free speech in the university must be inviolable.
 
Last edited:
And the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction, don’t you think?
 
meltzerboy2 said:
including conservative Christians, and that they are often intimidated. Free speech in the university must be inviolable.
Click to expand...
I agree and the intimidation is no different than 40 years ago…in the opposite direction. It’s a situation that Christians haven’t had to deal with before now…except in the year 100 ish. I understand exactly how uncomfortable and intimidating it can be. I experienced it for years as an atheist/agnostic. We shouldn’t behave this way…anybody! But humans do stuff like that. Look at the presidency and those for or against candidates. Obama was treated badly by Republicans and Trump was treated badly by Democrats and Biden will be treated badly by Republicans again…and no, it really wasn’t worse for one than the other…the reaction to it was different.

Absolutely, colleges should always be a fountain of free speech…even speech that makes other uncomfortable. It’s where we learn how to defend our ideas and solidify them. Enough of having to tamper down our speech…politeness, yes. But we should never be silent because someone might be sensitive or offended. Part of life is learning how to not take things personally and be offended. Criticizing ideas is different than criticizing a person. We all need to learn the difference.
 
Last edited:
Yes, common sense does not always equal truth. On the other hand, the current age seems determined to cancel not just truth but reality. I may be a biological man, but now I can be a woman just by declaring it is so. A non-marital union can be made marital by an act of will. A human being can be declared non human and killed. I can be a Catholic but now that is named as bigotry. We can tolerate anything but religion.

Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines. None of them were men.
 
Yes, I agree that criticism must be allowed but not before listening to other positions and trying to understand differing perspectives, even maybe being persuaded by them to change one’s own.
 
Yes, I can appreciate this perspective. However, discussion is a two-way street, so that you must also at least attempt to understand how and why others have perspectives that may differ from yours even if you do not agree with them.

With regard to Solomon, I get your point; but you must admit, I think, that any man who has 700 wives and 300 concubines is not exactly a good role model with regard to matrimony.
 
Last edited:
Pufi said:
The places of higher education should be the places, where all the ideas should be open for discussion. But, of course, criticism also must be allowed - that is also part of the free marketplace of ideas.
Click to expand...
This is the point: the places of higher learning only want the free exchange of ideas…in one direction. Criticism will immediately be met with accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, transphobia, etc.

Debate is a good thing.
 
KMC said:
Criticism will immediately be met with accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, transphobia, etc.
Click to expand...
Are you not able to counter those accusations, though? It may be unfair and definitely bad manners to throw those words around but arguments that show you aren’t those names and aren’t going to be intimidated by them will go a long way to stop the accusations.

Perhaps if you are called a bigot for a religious viewpoint, you should explain how it’s a wrong term? In the past, one could throw out many Christian perspectives and never be questioned or challenged whereas opposing views had to constantly be defended.

There is also the possibility in some cases that the labels are correct…just a thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top