Twelve years of primary and secondary education at Roman Catholic schools will make almost anyone respect and appreciate the University of Notre Dame, and that includes me. It is a very special place. That is why it has been so distressing to see some misguided souls in the Fighting Irish community choose the wrong fight in making it so difficult for the President of the United States to speak there today and to receive an honorary degree.
The Notre Dame leadership's early reaction to the idea that President Obama might receive an honorary degree was almost laughable. Word from the top was that, well, the former president of The Harvard Law Review, community advocate, law professor, State Senator, U.S. Senator and sitting U.S. President in the cross hairs of one of the greatest set of challenges ever facing a national leader needed more seasoning before such a privilege could be bestowed upon him. Oh sure.
Of course, the real opposition to Obama's presence in South Bend today was fulminated by hard-right Catholics who oppose abortion. Yes, there are effective arguments opposing a woman's right to choose as there are some good people who argue this point of view in a decent, open-minded manner. To contend that the most important leader in the world, however, should be denied access to the pulpit because he happens to disagree with this aspect of Church doctrine is patently absurd. It also weakens pro-life arguments by forcing reasonable people to ask, "What are you afraid of?"
After all, Notre Dame has seen fit in recent years to honor President George W. Bush whose support - if not palpable zeal - for capital punishment runs counter to Church doctrine. So too, the university similarly feted former NSC Chief and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice who joined her boss in creating one of the most immoral wars of our time, which also ran afoul of the Vatican's appropriate opposition to the Iraq War. Where was the right-wing furor then?
The narrow-minded but ever-predictable histrionics of Randall Terry, Pat Buchanan, and the Cardinal Newman Society underscore, once again, the embarrassment that is fundamentalism. These certain few who insist that the rest of us share their fear of intelligent voices who may disagree with their particular orthodoxy expose the weakness of fundamentalism. Regrettably, they also tarnish those otherwise noble institutions that choose to enlist them in their cause. These are especially treacherous waters for serious academic institutions that, above all else, must provide platforms upon which all reasonable people can express their views.
If commencement speakers are to pass narrow ideological litmus tests that must constitute agreement with the views of 100 percent of the members of any community, let alone the official views of the host institution itself, we will simply no longer have any commencement speakers. And that would be a victory for those who wish to silence any and all voices that contradict their own.
The Notre Dame leadership's early reaction to the idea that President Obama might receive an honorary degree was almost laughable. Word from the top was that, well, the former president of The Harvard Law Review, community advocate, law professor, State Senator, U.S. Senator and sitting U.S. President in the cross hairs of one of the greatest set of challenges ever facing a national leader needed more seasoning before such a privilege could be bestowed upon him. Oh sure.
Of course, the real opposition to Obama's presence in South Bend today was fulminated by hard-right Catholics who oppose abortion. Yes, there are effective arguments opposing a woman's right to choose as there are some good people who argue this point of view in a decent, open-minded manner. To contend that the most important leader in the world, however, should be denied access to the pulpit because he happens to disagree with this aspect of Church doctrine is patently absurd. It also weakens pro-life arguments by forcing reasonable people to ask, "What are you afraid of?"
After all, Notre Dame has seen fit in recent years to honor President George W. Bush whose support - if not palpable zeal - for capital punishment runs counter to Church doctrine. So too, the university similarly feted former NSC Chief and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice who joined her boss in creating one of the most immoral wars of our time, which also ran afoul of the Vatican's appropriate opposition to the Iraq War. Where was the right-wing furor then?
The narrow-minded but ever-predictable histrionics of Randall Terry, Pat Buchanan, and the Cardinal Newman Society underscore, once again, the embarrassment that is fundamentalism. These certain few who insist that the rest of us share their fear of intelligent voices who may disagree with their particular orthodoxy expose the weakness of fundamentalism. Regrettably, they also tarnish those otherwise noble institutions that choose to enlist them in their cause. These are especially treacherous waters for serious academic institutions that, above all else, must provide platforms upon which all reasonable people can express their views.
If commencement speakers are to pass narrow ideological litmus tests that must constitute agreement with the views of 100 percent of the members of any community, let alone the official views of the host institution itself, we will simply no longer have any commencement speakers. And that would be a victory for those who wish to silence any and all voices that contradict their own.