Princeton University Complicit In Prof. Robert George’s Anti-Gay Hate Speech
The Board of Trustees of Princeton University is routinely allowing Professor Robert George – a kingpin among today’s political gay bashers – to violate Academic Integrity as it is described in the university’s Code of Conduct.
Why does Princeton routinely allow Professor George his violations of academic integrity? Max Blumenthal has reported on George here (another of his George-related articles, A Hoax Exposed at Princeton, can be read here). In an internet message, Blumenthal told me that Professor George is “untouchable” because he “brings the university too much money from right-wing sources.” Readers not yet familiar with the immense harm Professor George inflicts on sexual minorities in the U.S. and elsewhere through his fact-challenged anti-gay hate speech published with the Princeton University name attached to it should be sure to research that topic. Here, for starters, is a video from an anti-gay hate rally sponsored by a hate group George founded, the so-called National Organization for Marriage. At that hate rally, a preacher yelled through a megaphone at a mob of anti-gay bigots that God says that homosexuals are “worthy to death.”
Academic freedom must not be construed as a right to falsify the documented record in order to stack the deck politically against a minority, (or for any other reason, for that matter). Yet George does precisely that, with alarming frequency. Were similarly fact-challenged, sham scholarship published in a field with lesser perceived “moral” angles – say, in Elizabethan Studies or Physics – the professor, his department and his university would be academic laughing stocks.
Princeton’s Code of Conduct says this about academic integrity: “Academic freedom can flourish only in a community of scholars which recognizes that intellectual integrity, with its accompanying rights and responsibilities, lies at the heart of its mission. Observing basic honesty in one’s work, words, ideas, and actions is a principle to which all members of the community are required to subscribe.” (The bolding is mine).
Notice very carefully that Princeton’s Code of Conduct says that “all” members of the community are required to observe basic honesty in their work. There is no printed exception to that honesty requirement for major political gay bashers that bring a lot of money to the university. Below, several examples of Princeton Professor Robert George’s cavalier disregard for honesty in a scholarly context.
Source: George’s essay What is Marriage? co-authored with university Ph.D. candidates and published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy
Professor George’s absurd, non-factual claim: “The demands of our common human nature” have led to all of our religious traditions recognizing marriage as being between men and women only.
George’s claim is absurd and non-factual because; Many Native American religions embraced alternate gender identity and expression and along with that, same sex unions. Some tribes that endorsed same sex unions even lived on or near the property now Princeton. Other faith traditions that endorse same sex unions include Zen Buddhism, Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalism.
What George might face in a Ph.D. oral exam: “Mr. George; how does your claim that “the demands of our common human nature” made all religious traditions reject same sex couplings square with the endorsements of same sex unions found in many Native American religions, Zen Buddhism, Reform Judaism and Unitarian Universalism?”
Source: George’s Afterword to Ronald J. Rychlak’s Hilter, the War and the Pope
Professor George’s absurd, non-factual claim: In this essay, George defends Pope Pius XII against criticisms of his behavior during WWII. He alleges that what he calls the “myth” that Pius sometimes calculatingly acted in Hitler’s favor is sustained as part of a larger effort to undermine the credibility and weaken the moral and cultural influence of the Catholic Church. George goes on to allege that those critical of Pius XII are seeking to weaken the moral influence of the Catholic Church because it is the single most potent force of traditional morality in cultural conflicts with secular ideologies.
George’s claim is absurd and non-factual because: 1) Pope Pius XII more than once prioritized i) preserving the power of the Catholic Church over ii) opposing Nazism and 2) despite what George alleges, there is no conspiracy among historians to examine the WWII era for the purpose of weakening the Catholic Church. It should additionally be noted that the Vatican has yet to give scholars access to all of its records pertaining to Pope Pius XII. Here, you can read about how George misrepresented scientific findings in a context of claiming the current Pope’s religious opinions are relevant to U.S. law.
What George might face in a Ph.D. oral exam: Mr. George; At the time that Cardinal Pacelli – (later Pope Pius XII) — signed the Reichskonkordat treaty of cooperation between Hitler and the Vatican, enhancing Hitler’s international prestige, were laws banning Jews from the professions already in place in Germany, and did the Reichskonkordat pledge the loyalty of German Bishops to the Nazi government? Also, if secularists wanted to attempt to lessen the influence of the Catholic Church today, why would they talk about Pope Pius XII’s agreements with Adolph Hitler, rather than to call additional attention to Archbishop Timothy Dolan’s vigorous politicking against proposed legislation to lift the statutes of limitations on prosecution of child rape?
Source: George’s essay What’s Sex Got to do With It?; Marriage, Morality and Rationality
Professor George’s absurd, non-factual claim: “The consequences of French Enlightenment ideas regarding marriage, sex, and childrearing were catastrophic.”
George’s claim is absurd and non-factual because: For centuries prior to the Enlightenment in France, marriages among Catholics were legally privileged over those among persons of other religions, i.e. the state treated non-Catholic married couples as inferiors.
What George might face in a Ph.D. oral exam: Mr. George; you say that French Enlightenment ideas apropos of marriage led to catastrophe. Did French Enlightenment ideas worsen or improve the plights of married domestic violence victims? And, why was it a catastrophe for the French Enlightenment to result in married Jewish, Protestant and atheist couples being treated as Catholic couples’ legal equals?
As Blumenthal reported, Professor George’s James Madison Program at Princeton University is funded mainly by right-wing sources from outside the university. It apparently receives no money from the university’s endowment. On the program’s welcome page, Professor George notes that 1) The Madison program awards a Senior Thesis Prize for excellence in Constitutional Law and Political Thought and 2) the success of the James Madison Program depends on the support of foundations and private individuals who share its commitment in advancing the understanding and appreciation of American ideals and institutions. Here, you can read about how 1) the James Madison Program has a core mission of combatting liberalism, (say, on the matter of gay rights) both in the academy and in politics; 2) how the Senior Thesis Prize was endowed by a donor and 3) how Professor George believes conforming with a donor’s intent is sacred. The James Madison Program at Princeton University may not exist solely to perpetuate sexual orientation apartheid in society, but that is one of the reasons for its existence, and its donors are contributing to Professor George’s program at least in part to help him train young reactionaries to perpetuate sexual orientation apartheid.
Professor George apparently does not hesitate to involve Princeton students in his scholarly charlatanism. His fact-challenged journal article What is Marriage? was co-authored by a Princeton University Ph.D. candidate and a Ph.D. candidate from the University of Notre Dame. The article consistently reflects Professor George’s bullying non-acceptance of gay human beings.
Here are some important additional references regarding Princeton Professor Robert George’s bullying non-acceptance of gay human beings. In this article, George 1) attacks Williams College for having a program designed to counter anti-gay bigotry; 2) defames Williams College by suggesting that the anti-gay bigotry program devastates the quality of scholarship at the school and 3) suggests that “sodomy” is immoral and an affront to human dignity.
When a coalition of thirteen modern health and educational organizations published and distributed Just the Facts about Sexual Orientation and Youth¸ Princeton Professor Robert George went on the attack. I investigated the matter in-depth, by contacting coalition members as well as Professor George. Here are some questions sent to George and copied to Princeton President Shirley M. Tilghman as well as to the university’s communications department: Do you believe it is consistent with best modern mental health practices to tell high school students only negative things about homosexuality? If so, please direct me to several peer-reviewed studies showing that it is best modern mental health practice to tell high school students only negative things about homosexuality.
Professor George and Princeton University ignored those questions. Many coalition members, however, responded to my requests for comment about Professor George’s attacks against the Just the Facts publication. Kitty Porterfield of the American Association of School Administrators told me: “Any type of discrimination is a negative that we have a legal and moral obligation to stop. AASA supports a publication about protecting gay students, even as we have supported ending sexual harassment and racial discrimination.” The American Psychological Association’s Deputy Executive Director for Public and Member Communications, Kim I. Mills said: “The American Psychological Association has called on psychologists to take the lead in removing the stigma . . that has long been associated with lesbian, gay, and bisexual orientations. In addition, research by an APA task force concluded that there was no evidence that attempts to change people’s sexual orientation are effective.”
Around the country and beyond, anti-gay hate groups cite Robert George’s fact-challenged anti-gay hate speech in association with the Princeton University name because of their perception that the Princeton University name imparts intellectual honor on the anti-gay hate speech. It is past time for Princeton University to stop lending its name to fact-challenged anti-gay hate speech. Professor Robert George’s fact-challenged anti-gay hate speech is being promulgated and used counter to Princeton University’s published requirements for its scholars to observe basic honesty in their work, words, ideas and actions. At this link is a petition you can sign, asking the Princeton University Board of Trustees finally to take a stand against Professor Robert George’s sham scholarship and his anti-gay bigotry.