Smith College students protest the ’Born Gay Hoax’- Page 3

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/7/08 at 12:54pm

"The Boston Tea Party may have been considered 'rude' and 'irresponsible' but it was certainly effective and it got the point across. "


As did Rosa Parks' civil disobedience

As did MLK's

As did Susan B Anthony's

[kelzama]

Posted: 5/7/08 at 1:29pm

They've also succeeded in giving this man and his book a voice far beyond the confines of that room.

[LePetiteFromage]

Posted: 5/7/08 at 1:35pm

Updated On: 1/23/09 at 01:35 PM

[lildogs]

Posted: 5/7/08 at 3:13pm

"They've also succeeded in giving this man and his book a voice far beyond the confines of that room. "

I know, but this is America, so there's always a venue for a jackass.


Like BWW is for me.

[East Village]

Posted: 5/7/08 at 4:09pm

harper wrote:
"There is no clinical research proving that people are either born gay/straight/bi, etc, nor is their research proving that homosexuality is completely founded in environment."

However, there are true scientific pursuits investigating the formation of sexuality that include a variety of disciplines from psychoanalysis through neurology. They present research and draw conclusions open to review by peers in their respective sciences. Sorba does not do this. He proselytizes and masks it behind scientific speech -- not unlike those who want to date the history of the planet at 3000 years and point to the fossil records as deceptions placed there by Satan.

I found it completely appropriate for members of the student body to protest since Sorba was presenting his dubious science at one of the country's foremost academic institutions. There's a difference between a pundit with an unpopular message and someone who promotes bad science.
Updated On: 5/7/08 at 04:09 PM

[KrissySim]

Posted: 5/7/08 at 5:18pm

I rather agree with Smith College president Carol T. Christ's response. I certainly think that students had a right to demonstrate and protest, but I'm not certain that they chose the best approach. Nevertheless, they certainly got the attention they wanted. Whether that's ultimately the best way to go about it? I think it would have been better to do it in a way that made the speaker look like a complete idiot and not make the protesters look disruptive.

[East Village]

Posted: 5/7/08 at 7:28pm

You can also bet Sorba is going to try to use this college tour to add legitimacy to his false science -- and would probably have dragged the good name of Smith College into it if the protesters hadn't stopped him. Good for the students for drawing a line in the sand.

[KrissySim]

Posted: 5/8/08 at 2:23am

Whatever Sorba tries to do to add legitimacy, he has science working against him. Smith College's name isn't going to be dragged anywhere. Sorba was the invited speaker of an apparently (and hopefully) unpopular student group which was exercising its right as a student group to invite a speaker.

I don't know enough about the whole context of the events to say what should or should not have been done, but I can't help but wonder if there may have been a better way to approach the issue without making it look like a side show. But then the side show did draw a lot of attention and was probably fun to stage. It is an emotionally charged issue and maybe the protesters needed to vent.

There is an easy way to draw a line. If you don't like what someone says, you can fire a gun at their head. That will stop the person from talking forever and put to rest any worries about the person legitimizing his or her own argument.

All I am saying is that some approaches (like the gun) can backfire and can play into the speaker's own hands. I will be interested in hearing what the findings are of Carol T. Christ's investigation. Please keep us posted.