Freedom of Conscience

Liberty cannot exist in a society in which people are forced to conform their thoughts and expression to an official viewpoint. Differences of opinion are the natural byproducts of a vibrant, free society. At many of our nation's colleges and universities, however, students are expected to share a single viewpoint on controversial matters like the meaning of diversity, the particulars of racism, and the impermissibility of "hate speech." Mandatory "diversity training," in which students are instructed in an officially-approved ideology, is commonplace. Some institutions have enacted policies that require students to speak and even share identical attitudes on these matters or face disciplinary charges. The FIRE cases listed below showcase our efforts to roll back this unprecedented intrusion into students' freedom of conscience and ensure that students are given the right to make up their own minds on the issues of the day -- without administrative coercion.

• Read "Thought Reform 101" by Alan Charles Kors.

Cases

• Bucks County Community College: Ideological Loyalty Oath for Professors
• Central Michigan University: Student Group's Freedom of Association Under Attack
• Citrus College: Compulsory Anti-War Speech
• Columbia University: Ideological Litmus Tests at Teachers College
• CSWE: Political Litmus Tests at Schools of Social Work
• Florida International University: Racial and Ethnic Restrictions for Class Enrollment
• Hamline University: Student Suspended after Advocating Concealed Carry on Campus
• Hampton University: Gay and Lesbian Student Group Denied Recognition Without Explanation
• Harvard University: Proposed Speech Codes
• Le Moyne College: Dismissal of Student for Dissenting Views
• Michigan State University: Program of Thought Reform
• Monterey Peninsula College: Ideological Litmus Loyalty Oath for Professors
• NCATE: Encouragement of Political Litmus Tests in Higher Education
• Pennsylvania House of Representatives Select Committee on Student Academic Freedom
• Rhode Island College: Violation of Student’s Freedom of Conscience
• University of Delaware: Students Required to Undergo Ideological Reeducation
• University of North Carolina System: State of the First Amendment
• University of South Carolina: Mandated Orthodoxy in the Classroom
• University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire: Unconstitutional Student Fee Funding Amendment
• Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech): Ban on Certain Viewpoints and Requirement of Prior Approval for Speech
• Washington State University: Use of Dispositions Theory to Enforce Ideological Orthodoxy
• Washington University: Mandatory University Viewpoint

Articles and News Items

• "FIRE Intern Fights Diversity Training at Virginia," October 1, 2003: Anthony Dick, a courageous University of Virginia (UVA) undergraduate and a FIRE summer intern, is taking his fight for freedom of thought directly to campus. This fall, along with other concerned students, he formed the Individual Rights Coalition (IRC) at UVA in order to oppose Orwellian thought reform on his campus.
• "Diversity Training Revisited," September 12, 2003: Each September, students and others are called to attend "diversity training" seminars and sessions. Critics of such programs often refer peers and colleagues to Alan Charles Kors, "Thought Reform 101." This fall, a defender of such training sessions circulated a critique of Kors's article and agreed to post his criticism on FIRE's website.
• "Big mandate on campus," Lynn Vincent, World, September 17, 2002: World Magazine’s cover story reveals the scandal of freshman orientations—their politicized nature and their parallel to totalitarian thought reform.
• "Ticketing the Campus Thought Police," Jonathan Yardley, The Washington Post, November 12, 2001
• "The Immorality of False "Diversity"," October 30, 2001: Andrew J. LeVay, an attorney who participates in FIRE's Legal Network, has written a profound editorial for The Boston Globe on the moral abyss of imposed group identity in higher education.
• "Thought Reform 101," Alan Charles Kors, Reason, March 1, 2000: Political correctness is not the end of human liberty, because political correctness does not have power commensurate with its aspirations. It is essential, however, to understand those totalizing ambitions for what they are.
• "Using Race to Divide, Not Unite," Nat Hentoff, The Washington Times, February 28, 2000: But there is still a long way to go before we see each other, as individuals, beyond the color line. And Thurgood Marshall was right. That day will come sooner if our children learn together from kindergarten on, and are not separated later by college administrators with limited vision.

• Printer Friendly
• Send This Page