If pre-Katrina aerial photographs are an inferior representation of the Gulf Coast geography, then isn't it also true that snow-free pictures of Montana and Minnesota are inferior? In other words, if you think post-Katrina photos would be more accurate, then you should also agree that snowed-over photos of the northern states would be more accurate. Reductio ad absurdum.
It seems from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article that Marquette is justifying its decision on the basis that its dental students are expected to follow a professional code of conduct. This is not, in general, an unreasonable position. Regardless of whether Marquette is to be considered a public or private institution, its administrators are entitled to enforce certain norms of behavior.
In deciding the case at hand, the true question is whether the student's comments were public or private. If private, they should not be subject to regulation. If public in the way that a newspaper article or a bathroom graffito is public, their author must take responsibility for his words and defend them on the basis of their content. The right way to argue on his behalf is not to claim that he is entitled to say anything he pleases, but to show that his words did not violate the university's regulations.
Slashdot Mirror
If pre-Katrina aerial photographs are an inferior representation of the Gulf Coast geography, then isn't it also true that snow-free pictures of Montana and Minnesota are inferior? In other words, if you think post-Katrina photos would be more accurate, then you should also agree that snowed-over photos of the northern states would be more accurate. Reductio ad absurdum.
It seems from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article that Marquette is justifying its decision on the basis that its dental students are expected to follow a professional code of conduct. This is not, in general, an unreasonable position. Regardless of whether Marquette is to be considered a public or private institution, its administrators are entitled to enforce certain norms of behavior.
In deciding the case at hand, the true question is whether the student's comments were public or private. If private, they should not be subject to regulation. If public in the way that a newspaper article or a bathroom graffito is public, their author must take responsibility for his words and defend them on the basis of their content. The right way to argue on his behalf is not to claim that he is entitled to say anything he pleases, but to show that his words did not violate the university's regulations.