A Wise Reaction

WOULDN'T IT BE nice if individuals could organize their thought processes into neat, individual compartments, as the majority suggests that Mr. Pattullo can?

Having correctly explained why Pattullo's statements must be considered dangerous and inappropriate, the majority goes on to chastise the Gay Students Association for reacting to them. The reason the GSA is over-reacting, the majority believes, is that while Pattullo's views may be worthy of condemnation on a personal level, there is no reason to assume that they will affect his professional judgment. The GSA should have evidence of professional wrongdoing before calling for an investigation of Pattullo's Center for Behavioral Studies, the majority says.

The majority thus imagines a distinction where none in fact exists. If Pattullo disagrees with being gay as a lifestyle on a personal level, how can he be expected to put his feelings aside while dealing with gay members of the Center? And how can gay students feel comfortable working with a Faculty member who wants to subject them to "negative social pressure?"

The majority mistakenly portrays the issue as one of free speech. Implying that the GSA is abridging Pattullo's rights. In fact the GSA is in no way hampering anyone's right to free speech. The GSA simply realizes that in a responsible society such as ours, there are consequences to all actions, especially speaking.

Pattullo is certainly free to write whatever opinions he likes in public letters. But he must be made to understand that he can not then betree of the consequences. All the GSA is asking with its request for an investigation of the center is that Pattullo be made to pay a reasonable price for his repressive views.

The University should now be bending over backwards to honor the request of the GSA, which has already endured more than its fair share of negative societal pressure. Now it's Pattullo's turn.