Sunday, June 23, 2019




The Dis-Grace of Harvard
    
This week, Parkland survivor Kyle Kashuv announced that Harvard University has withdrawn his acceptance to the college. In the aftermath of the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, the then-high school junior became a prominent voice for school safety, meeting with politicians across the political spectrum. He was also a prominent defender of Second Amendment rights. After scoring 1550 on his SATs and graduating second in his class, Kashuv was admitted to Harvard, turning down scholarship money at other schools to do so.

Then came the tsunami.

Former classmates who oppose Kashuv’s politics revealed on social media that when he was 16, months before the Parkland shooting, he typed egregious racist slurs, including the N-word, in a private Google doc. This revelation led Kashuv to immediately apologize publicly for his use of the language, which he insisted was not a reflection of racist belief but a juvenile attempt to shock his peers. He pointed to his record of public-facing accomplishment and pledged to learn from his mistakes. He issued an apology to Harvard, taking full responsibility for his comments; he reached out to the Office of Diversity and Inclusion to see what steps he could take to assure them that he had changed.

No matter. Harvard’s admissions committee decided to withdraw his acceptance.

There are several lessons here — all of them bad for the country.

First, grace is no longer an aspect of American life — at least for one side of the aisle. Kashuv has been in the public eye for a year and a half. In that time, he has acted with remarkable poise, as have many others in his class. The fact that he participated in an idiotic and disgusting private group chat months before the Parkland shooting has had apparently no effect on his public behavior. If the new standard is that past private statements, once surfaced, override all public behavior since — including apologies, evidence of decency and willingness to evidence repentance — we are entering a dangerous new era. Is Harvard prepared for dredging up every incoming first year’s Twitter direct messages for scrutiny?

But that won’t be the standard, obviously. The commentariat calling for Kashuv’s expulsion was loudly decrying Harvard for having barred Michelle Jones, who killed her own 4-year-old, just two years ago. The problem for Kashuv is that he is conservative; the old racist slurs were merely a means of damaging him. There is little question that were pro-gun control David Hogg the Parkland survivor at issue rather than Kashuv, a little more grace might have been applied here.

Second, public life comes with inherent risks and thus should be avoided by rational actors. Kashuv would have been admitted to Harvard if he had never engaged in activism: He scored a 1550 on his SAT and graduated second in his class. No one on the radical left or alt-right would have tried to destroy his academic career; no one would have bothered. Kashuv dared to speak up politically and thus became a target. Rational actors will take note and stay away from the public square, leaving that square to the most shameless and the most enigmatic.

Third, Harvard has become an institution not for education but for capitulation to the mob. Forget Kashuv for a second. Focus instead on Harvard Law School professor Ronald Sullivan, a political liberal who was tossed as dean of a residential house for the grave sin of acting as a defense attorney on Harvey Weinstein’s team. Cross Harvard’s most radical students or the wokescolds on social media and the administration will capitulate in short order.

Kashuv will be fine. He’ll move on, go to another school, mature and grow. But Harvard won’t be a part of that process. The social media mob was motivated not by a desire to purify by our politics — after all, Ralph Northam is still governor of Virginia — but by a desire to damage the Parkland student they just didn’t like.

SOURCE 






High School Girl Who Lost Race to Transgender Athletes Files Federal Complaint

A female high school athlete who didn’t qualify for a track event because two boys who identify as girls ran faster filed a complaint Monday with the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights.

“No one in the state of Connecticut is happy about this, but no one has enough courage to speak up,” Selina Soule said during an interview with Tucker Carlson that aired Monday night on his Fox News Channel show.

Selina competes in track at Bloomfield High School in Bloomfield, Connecticut. She wasn’t able to qualify for the 55-meter event in the New England regionals because two spots were taken by biological boys, as The Daily Signal’s Kelsey Bolar documented in a recent video report on the 16-year-old’s situation.

She is far from the only female athlete disadvantaged by policies that allow transgender girls to compete with biological girls, Selina told Carlson on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.”

“I haven’t been the only one affected by this,” she said. “There have been countless other female athletes in the state of Connecticut, as well as my entire indoor track team. We missed out on winning the state open championship because of the team that the transgender athlete was on.”

Christiana Holcomb, legal counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian legal aid group, joined Selina for the interview. Holcomb said the organization filed the complaint to bring justice to Selina’s situation.

“Alliance Defending Freedom, on behalf of Selina and a couple of other brave female athletes, has filed or is in the process of filing a Title IX complaint asking the Department of Education to step in, to investigate, and to restore a level playing field for Selina,” Holcomb said.

The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights enforces Title IX, the federal law that “protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance,” according to the agency’s website. 

If the two boys who identify as girls had not been allowed to compete as girls, Selina says, she would have placed sixth and had the opportunity to run the 55 in front of college coaches at the New England regionals.

Her complaint, according to a press release from Alliance Defending Freedom, asks the Education Department “to investigate illegal discrimination against the Connecticut athletes,” including Selina.

Since the Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference implemented a protocol “that allows biological males who claim a female identity to compete in girls’ athletic events,” the complaint says, “boys have consistently deprived [Selina] Soule and the other female athletes of honors and opportunities to compete at elite levels.”

“Girls like Selina should never be forced to be spectators in their own sports, but, unfortunately, that is exactly what is taking place when you allow biological males to compete in sports that have been set aside and specifically designed for women like Selina,” Holcomb said. “Title IX was designed to ensure that girls have a fair shake at athletics, and are not denied the opportunity to participate at the highest levels of competition.”

Emilie Kao, director of the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal in an email that Selina should not be facing such discrimination.

“Women and girls should be free to compete in athletics without fear of injury, and with the expectation that their opponents will be of the same sex,” Kao said, adding:

Policies that allow males to self-identity as females in athletic competition are already politicizing sports and taking away accomplishments and scholarship opportunities from deserving female athletes like Selina Soule and her classmates.

Since Congress passed Title IX in 1972, the number of women and girls participating in sports has risen from 1 in 27 to 2 in 5. This has benefitted their performance in classes as well as on the playing fields.

By ignoring the reality of sex differences, gender identity policies threaten progress and create unfairness and danger for female athletes. 

SOURCE 






Sending your child to college is playing Russian roulette with their values, character, and even joy of life

When assessing America’s or any of the Western world’s universities—wondering whether you should send your child to one; whether you should pay for a child to attend one; whether you should go into great debt to attend one; whether you should donate money to one; and related questions—it would seem that the single most important question to be answered is this: What type of person does the university produce?

It’s hard to imagine any parent—left, right, liberal, conservative, or apolitical—who would disagree with asking that question.

They would disagree about what constituted a desirable outcome. Obviously, left-wing parents would want their child’s college to send home a child with left-wing views, and a parent on the right would not be happy if his or her child returned home with left-wing views, but every parent would agree that the question “What type of person did college produce?” is an important one.

My belief is that, most of the time, colleges today produce a worse human being or, at the very least, a person who is no better, wiser, or more mature than when he or she graduated high school.

Let’s begin with behavioral issues.

There’s a good chance your son or daughter will have spent much of his or her free time at college partying, which often means getting drunk, smoking marijuana, and hooking up with someone for casual sex.

While none of those activities necessarily means your son or daughter became a worse human being, all of us can agree that none of them made your child a better one.

Regarding college drinking, Alcohol Rehab Guide, an online alcohol addiction site, reports:

A large percentage of college students consume alcohol by binge drinking. … For men, binge drinking involves drinking five or more alcoholic beverages in two hours. On the other hand, binge drinking for women is considered four or more drinks within a two-hour time period.

The website also states: “Roughly 80 percent of college students—four out of every five—consume alcohol to some degree. It’s estimated that 50 percent of those students engage in binge drinking … .”

BMC Public Health reported in 2013:

One young adult in two has entered university education in Western countries. … [This] is often associated with risky [behavior], such as excessive alcohol consumption. … We found that the more a student was exposed to college environmental factors, the greater the risk of heavy, frequent, and abusive drinking.

Alcohol consumption increased for students living on campus, living in a dormitory with a higher number of [roommates], and having been in the university for a long spell.

And we are all aware of the sexual activity that emanates from college drinking and can be regretted the next day (usually by the woman).

Then there is depression and mental illness at college. In the words of clinical psychologist Gregg Henriques in Psychology Today, “It is neither an exaggeration, nor is it alarmist to claim that there is a mental health crisis today facing America’s college students.

“Evidence suggests that this group has greater levels of stress and psychopathology than any time in the nation’s history.”

Now, let’s move on to values and character.

Did your son or daughter (or niece or nephew, grandson or granddaughter) return home from college more, less, or equally kind a person?

More, less, or equally respectful of you, his or her parent(s)?

More, less, or equally grateful to you for the monetary sacrifice you made to enable him or her to attend college?

More, less, or equally proud to be an American?

More, less, or equally respectful of religion?

More, less, or equally wise?

More, less, or equally committed to free speech?

More, less, or equally open to hearing views he or she disagrees with?

I think I know the answers to those questions, in most instances. But far more important than what I assume is what you will find out. Please ask not only the college students and recent college graduates, but also their parents and other relatives these questions.

Then decide whether you want to risk sending your child to a place that will greatly increase their chances of being depressed, engaging in binge drinking, and learning nothing important—while being taught how awful America is, why speech he or she doesn’t agree with should be suppressed, how pathetic religious Christians and Jews are, how wonderful religious Muslims are, and how important skin color is.

I acknowledge that students who are entering the science, technology, engineering, and math fields must attend college. But for most of the rest, sending your child to college is playing Russian roulette with their values, character, and even joy of life.

SOURCE 


No comments: