Wednesday, October 16, 2002

People have objected to my post below regarding Instapundit so let me explain. It was, first, a deliberate parody of the kind of hyperbolic rhetoric Reynolds sometimes uses, and used in that particular headline/post. The details of what he links to aren't quite justified what he writes - in particular, the lawyers were issued a challenge to debate someone, many apparently with only a week's notice, and they declined. This isn't quite the same thing as "NYU CAN'T FIND A SINGLE PROFESSOR willing to defend its policy."

As for my claim that he supports discrimination against gays, despite his claims to the contrary I think that's a fair characterization. Regardless of the historical relationship between the military and some universities, most of those universities have policies against campus recruiting by employers which discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. So, Glenn and others want them to make an exception for the military. He's chosen his side on this, as is his right, but it doesn't change the fact that what he is objecting to, in the end, are discrimination policies by these institutions, private or public.

As for the charges of bias by our favorite homophobe over at NRO, Stanley Kurtz, that this is proof that the academy is out of step with America and therefore a menace to society - if you don't like it start your own damn university. It's a very liberal perspective on powerful institutions these people seem to have.