Graduation Stories

[Dill]

(05-24-2019, 10:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You didn't answer the direct question posed you merely started asking other questions and talking about the Boston Tea Party and Civil Rights.

So let's try it again using your terms: If the majority of the  of this shared governance voted against Pence speaking why was he invited to speak?

Please don't tell me about the War of 1812, just answer the simple question posed. I know the simple answer. 

No one can answer your question, because there is no "owner" of Taylor University.  It is a non-profit corporation operating as a trust.

I merely started talking about other protests because you claimed that, somehow, the protestors in this case "made it about themselves." That assumption speaks to your framing of faculty actions as prima facie illegitimate. What the "owners" want settles it for you.

Taylor is struggling with a civil rights issue right now, centering on a conflict between its Christian mission statement and its commitment to equality and diversity (and adherence to federal regulations regarding this).  The protest is part of this struggle, and like virtually all civil rights protests in US history, this one has its detractors, those who place order and decorum above all else. That is what the protestors "made it about."

More and more explanation of shared governance.  This has three parts--faculty, board, administration--coordinated in a system of checks and balances. It does not mean they all vote as a group on every decision taken by the administration. That would be inefficient. Administration, like faculty in education matters, has a certain autonomy in administrative matters. The faculty vote was to show the administration that there was a problem with the Pence choice. The administration chose to ignore this.  As I said above, the administration may get away with this, or some heads may roll.  Think of this as like a Congressional resolution censuring the US president.