Wasted Words

When I started to read Grant Myers’ column in The Freep, for once I was excited. After seeing a political leader mentioned in the headline, I thought, maybe we have something substantial for once here, a commentary on government policy, something informative and invested with thought. But like always, I was disappointed. Grant Myers used a classic Daily Free Press editorial technique when he spent a few hundred words talking about one thing when he really intended to talk about something else. So what does Grant talk about after his wasted words? BU’s discrimination policy. No problem there, but it is how he talks about it that is problematic.

Grant starts with an admission of his own ignorance. He says, “Every action has two sides: what it is, and what it looks like.” He then goes on to make himself the speaker for the student body from the thoughtless standpoint of “what it looks like.” So we have an admitted ignorant speaker speaking for an audience of 30,000 people, whom, according to him, are ignorant as well. But it gets worse. Grant goes on to commit a logical fallacy. Now either he took PH150: Ethics for his COM philosophy requirement, or he did not pay enough attention in PH160: Reason and Argumentation. Grant’s logical conclusion is since BU refuses to place gays in its discrimination policy, it discriminates against — nay, “hates” — gays.

But let’s look at the inferred unthoughtful explanation of the president of the University: Since no evidence discrimination exists, there is no cause for action. Can someone tell a person is gay by merely looking at him, just as they can tell if you are black or a woman on sight? Can they tell you are gay by your name, as is the case of many Jewish people? Does BU ever ask the sexual orientation of its students? Since the answer to all of these questions is obviously no, is it possible that Jon Westling and John Silber, who happens to be a world-renowned Immanuel Kant scholar, may have cause in their actions? Look at their stance on the various policies; it is easy to see the cause for their actions. If they let males and females room together, would that not be encouraging sexual behavior? BU is a place of education — where does cable fit into that?

Grant Myers claims “the University administration is here to serve us” and is responsible to the students because we pay to go here. Here is another fallacy. We pay; we do not vote. This is not a democracy. So who should we trust: the admittedly ignorant opinion of a student who cannot make logical conclusions, or BU’s administration, which is working by logical cause-and-effect principles? Grant’s column is filled with logical flaws, liberal biases (calling the administration bigots) and Sesame Street morality and politics. I will take the men with Ph.D.s over the student who needs to retake PH160.