Issue date: 4/23/09 Section: Editorial/Opinion

This fall, UW-Eau Claire will offer a pilot phase of the Army Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) program, which offers leadership and military training to thousands of students nationwide.

Under the new program, current Eau Claire enrollees will no longer have to drive to UW-Stout to attend ROTC classes, and students interested in a career with the Army can start their journey right here in Eau Claire.

ROTC's arrival on campus should be seen as a positive development, but that is not the case for members of the campus group, Staff and Faculty for Peace and Justice.

On their listserve (publicly viewable at listserve.uwec.edu/sfpj), these members have expressed dismay at "insidious" ROTC's presence on campus.

"I couldn't help but be a little alarmed that of all the courses of study UWEC could add … [it is] adding ROTC. What was wrong with the current arrangement of students taking courses at Stout? Is this what the premier liberal arts undergraduate institution wants?"

Well, why shouldn't we have it?

The biggest complaint against ROTC that they voiced was that the military discriminates against homosexuals.

Is that really true?

US Code Title 10, Subtitle G, Section 654; which passed in 1993 with bipartisan support in both houses, says that anyone who engages in homosexual acts while serving in the military will be dismissed (note that it does not exclude people simply on the basis of their sexual orientation).

Why does the military prohibit such behavior? The law states that those who "demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability."

Such prohibition is fully legal, as allowed by Article 2, Section 8 of the Constitution: Congress has the power to "make rules for government and regulation [of the military]."

Lending support to this are 1,050 retired military officers who recently sent an open letter to President Obama and Congress that affirmed the necessity of this policy. The military has the right to decide who is fit to serve, and if that means that a certain group of people is excluded because their behavior is harmful to the core elements of military society, so be it.

But complaints about ROTC are not the main issue. What is genuinely troubling is that these staff and faculty members have written about stirring up opposition to the program, and it hasn't even started yet.

"One other thing potentially worth doing - contacting sympathetic students … to organize opposition to ROTC … getting students to express their opposition in significant numbers might also have an impact -

perhaps even more than staff and faculty opposition."

They have also written about leaning on university senators to oppose the program, which is also troubling because if ROTC is going to remain on campus after next year, it needs to be approved by the university's shared governance system. Again, this begs the question: why are these people trying to shut ROTC down before it is even given a chance?

One of Eau Claire's liberal education learning goals is "respect for diversity among people."

Diversity does not mean that only people that you agree with get to have their say, yet sadly, that is how some choose to define it.

For example, a professor once told me that because I disagreed with him, I could not ever possibly learn from him, and I should not even be allowed to take one of his courses because of my beliefs. I was forced to drop his class before the school year even began.

This campus is full of groups that represent different viewpoints, from College Republicans to SPECTRUM. Their viewpoints all have a place in the marketplace of ideas. No one ever talks about shutting one of them down because of the beliefs that they represent.

Why is our military the exception?

The U.S. military has liberated entire continents, stopped the mass slaughter of Jews, homosexuals, and the handicapped; and brought humanitarian aid to the farthest reaches of the globe. Yet, to some faculty members, they don't fit the bill for "diversity," which is incredibly insulting because it is the military's sacrifice that secures our freedom to be diverse, whether intellectually or otherwise.

If you believe in that freedom, and that students should not be denied the opportunity to learn from different viewpoints, then give ROTC a chance. If it is something that we want to remain on campus, fight for it to stay.

Students have the right to learn regardless of who is teaching them.

Anyone, regardless of their place within the university power structure, who seeks to trample upon that right, is committing a severe injustice against not only we students, but the idea of higher learning itself.

McCormick is a junior history major and guest columnist for The Spectator.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools