Petition to David Yager
Protect Professor Camille Paglia From Political Persecution
Sheridan Merrick started a petition to fire a tenured Professor, Camille Paglia, from the University of the Arts for her dissenting views on how best to accommodate transgender individuals and to handle cases of sexual assault. Professor Camille Paglia is the author of Sexual Personae; Free Women, Free Men; Vamps & Tramps; Break, Blow, Burn; and Glittering Images, books of breathtaking scope and towering erudition on art, feminism, politics, sex, and education. Professor Camille Paglia's positions are thoughtful, nuanced, provocative, but never unfair or unnecessarily cruel. Here are a few short videos of who she is and what she stands for. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75bAwqBlVJk&list=PLqUrDO_vbAuZi-0pfyTUfv4AK8vMg8oiY&index=15 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YB7w-NrZSA&list=PLqUrDO_vbAuZi-0pfyTUfv4AK8vMg8oiY&index=16 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E-q2sXLCfY&list=PLqUrDO_vbAuZi-0pfyTUfv4AK8vMg8oiY&index=17 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kb7U1KXR70I&list=PLqUrDO_vbAuZi-0pfyTUfv4AK8vMg8oiY&index=18 Here is the video that Sheridan Merrick took issue with. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRX4gscvHtA&list=PLqUrDO_vbAuZi-0pfyTUfv4AK8vMg8oiY&index=12 University professors have tenure precisely to protect both the professors and their intellectual integrity against political pressure from both establishments and mobs. UArts must stand up for Camille Paglia's right to think, speak, and write freely. Please sign this petition if you agree that UArts should allow Professor Camille Paglia to: Continue her work at UArts without change, Debate and answer questions from the students who disagree with her in an undisrupted setting.
Petition to Queen's University, Daniel Woolf, James Leech
Queen’s University: Endorse the Chicago Principles on Freedom of Expression
Recent events across North American university campuses have sparked a vibrant conversation around the balance between free speech and sacrosanct ideas. Guest speakers have had their talks cancelled due to safety issues at protests, professors have lost or had their jobs threatened for unpopular remarks and students report a reluctance to express their opinions for fear of being socially and publicly ostracized. As a result, the role of universities as a forum for open debate and dialogue is in question. Given this trend, we are concerned about the potential suppression of viewpoint diversity at Queen’s. A university’s primary purpose is to facilitate learning through exposure to different ideas by guaranteeing the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, question and challenge. As a highly-regarded and publicly funded institution, Queen’s has a duty to hold space for competing ideas, including those that differ from the norm, even if they are considered by some or even most members of its community to be offensive, unwise or immoral. Queen’s has a mixed record with respect to free speech, free inquiry, free expression and free thought. Academic freedom is specifically highlighted in Article 14 of the collective agreement between Queen’s and its faculty; and a statement released in 1979 on "Freedom to Read" is still available on the Secretariat's website. Queen's identifies free inquiry and free expression of ideas as essential values and its “End to Hate” project even acknowledges that there is a role for vigorous disagreement over legal remedies in cases of disrespectful or demeaning speech. However, in 2012 Queen's dismissed a professor for using politically incorrect language, even though a Canadian Association of University Teachers report found that he "discharged his duties in keeping with professional standards", and the language was used for educational reasons. The following year, a free speech wall was taken down by the school due to what was labelled "offensive content", though no specific examples were offered. As a result, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has graded Queen's University a 'C' for its policies and 'D' for its practices in its 2015 Campus Freedom Index report. Thus, there is room for improvement. Several American universities, including Princeton and Columbia, have reaffirmed their commitment to free, uninhibited debate by endorsing the University of Chicago’s Report of the Committee on Freedom of Expression, commonly referred to as the “Chicago Principles”. The strength of the Chicago Principles is that they acknowledge the natural balance between permitting free speech and protecting civil rights. For example, the Principles note that "The freedom to debate and discuss the merits of competing ideas does not, of course, mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish. The University may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment, that unjustifiably invades substantial privacy or confidentiality interests, or that is otherwise directly incompatible with the functioning of the University." This means that any hate speech, insofar as it is prohibited under Canadian law, would not be permitted by the endorsement of the Chicago Principles. The Principles simply stipulate that the school would hold space for speech as far as the law would permit, not beyond. While the adoption of the Chicago Principles alone will not fundamentally ensure that Queen’s will continue to maintain and develop a culture of free inquiry and free expression (this responsibility has always and will always remain shared between the students, alumni, faculty administration and other stakeholders), this move represents a critical initial step. It will also make Queen’s the first Canadian university to publicly take this action amidst the growing focus this issue demands. We request that Queen’s University asserts itself as a defender of free speech and expression through the endorsement of the Chicago Principles. If you are affiliated with Queen's, as a faculty member, administrator, student, alumnus, donor or another stakeholder, please send your name and key background details to email@example.com so this information can be presented to Principal Woolf. Examples are below: Jane Alpha, AppSci '84; Dr. John Beta, Adjunct Professor, Smith School of Business; Dr. Tina Kappa, Regular Donor, Medical School
Petition to Doug Ford
Stop Doug Ford's Anti-Protest Law!
We the undersigned oppose Doug Ford’s Orwellian “free speech on campus” policy. This policy is an attack on freedom of speech and aims to crack down on student protests. This directive will strip funding from universities unwilling to police dissent. It will remove funding and recognition from student unions who do not wish to be complicit. Student clubs protesting hateful groups can be defunded and dissolved. Individual students will face discipline and possible expulsion. Ford’s directive cites the University of Chicago statement that prohibits “ongoing disruptive protesting”. But such vague criteria leaves the road open to prohibit all protests. Who decides what period is too long? Who decides how big a protest can become before it qualifies as “disruptive”? Ford is promoting this policy as payback to the far right and social conservatives who helped him win the PC leadership race. It will provide a police-protected “safe space” to anti-abortionists holding obscene displays, alt-right racists, and those denying the Holocaust. This policy is a direct attack on the time-honoured tradition of civil disobedience on campus. We encourage universities and student unions to refuse to participate in this anti-protest policy, especially the anti-free speech, University of Chicago-inspired statement.
Petition to Doug Ford, Lisa Thompson, Merrilee Fullerton
Stop Doug Ford's Orwellian "Free Speech" Policies
This past week, Doug Ford's office issued a directive negatively impacting all University and College students in Ontario. It calls for "Upholding Free Speech on Ontario's University and College Campuses", except it does the complete opposite by villainizing campus protests and student unions. It requires schools to develop new free speech policies "modelled after the University of Chicago Statement on Principles of Free Expression", except this was a non-binding vision statement which did not call for student groups to be stripped of their funding if they failed to comply. Not only does this stifle free speech on campus, it is an Orwellian interpretation of free speech that is an unprecedented abuse of university autonomy and only stands to undermine institutions' learning environments. Some news outlets have been musing that this is simply a follow-up to campaign promises made to appease alt-right groups following the removal of Tanya Granic Allen as a PC candidate, well known for her homophobic views, during his spring campaign. Motivations aside, this move simply serves to promote Doug Ford's social conservative agenda. In practice, it will mean that campuses will become safe-havens for the likes of Milo Yiannopoulos or neo-Nazi Richard Spencer who have frequently been interrupted by protestors on their speaking tours across North America. Please sign this petition to send a message to Doug Ford that University campuses are not his to tamper with! Universities will not be bullied into promoting his brand of politics; this policy needs to be repealed.