Universities should be spaces where individuals are free to question popular opinion
CHARLOTTETOWN (CUP) — University of Calgary professor and former political operative Tom Flanagan recently faced heavy scrutiny for questioning the illegality of viewing child porn. Flanagan previously served as a media pundit, political chief of staff to now-prime minister Stephen Harper, and political operative within the Alberta Wildrose party.
While lecturing on Aboriginal issues at the University of Lethbridge, Flanagan was called out by an irate student for having said, in 2009, “That’s actually another interesting debate or seminar. What’s wrong with child pornography, in the sense that it’s just pictures?”
Further taunted by a student in the crowd, Flanagan clarified on Wednesday evening. “I certainly have no sympathy for child molesters, but I do have some grave doubts about putting people in jail for their taste in pictures.”
That remark received jeers and boos from the crowd of students. Flanagan went on to clarify further.
“It is a real issue of personal liberty and to what extent we put people in jail for doing something in which they do not harm another person.”
External reaction was swift. The Prime Minister’s Office condemned Flanagan’s comments as “repugnant and appalling.” The Wildrose party halted his work with them immediately. The Premier of Alberta reported that the comments “turned [her] stomach,” and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation dumped him as an oft-appearing commentator on political science and public policy.
The University of Calgary also issued a statement distancing themselves from his remarks and announcing his retirement.
My question is this: Why was a professor retired for voicing an unpopular opinion in an academic setting? Further, why did students not challenge Flanagan’s thinking intelligently? Why instead did they boo him and call him disgusting? Has academic discourse in Canada descended into simple, guttural responses?
It’s disgraceful. Should we not challenge conventional thinking? If students cannot clearly and articulate an oppositional response to someone who advocates for the legalized viewing of child pornography, it is certain that our society faces bigger problems.
Without academic freedom, how can professors challenge ideas or propose new ones? More importantly, how can we justify the implementation and existence of current ideas or laws without exploring alternatives, however unpopular?
Academic freedom should provide protection for those wishing to provoke discussion on issues as controversial and taboo as child pornography. The Association of Universities and Colleges in Canada says that faculty must be free to take intellectual risks and tackle controversial subjects in their teaching, research and scholarship.
Dr. Flanagan took an intellectual risk, and tackled a controversial subject. His reward? Political disownment, early retirement, and media vilification.
Tread lightly, professors.
