I mean, would it be a stretch to say that any faculty member who openly supported Romney in the last election was guilty of the same crime as McCaskill? I don’t think so. His anti-gay marriage stance was very well known, and if McCaskill was disciplined for signing a petition, why wouldn’t other faculty members be disciplined for supporting an anti-gay candidate under the same principle?

I don’t think that a public declaration of opposing values to your employer should be protected by anti-discrimination laws. If the spokesperson for PETA appeared in a KFC ad campaign, PETA has the right to fire them. Their views are not being censored by their employer, the conditions of their employment are being breached by their actions. Employers have the right to terminate an employee that takes action to undermine the employers mission/goals.

So how can we then turn our backs on McCaskill? It’s the same basic principal. The only difference is content.

A good parallel would be whether you stand against censorship, or whether you only stand against being yourself censored for your particular views because you’re very right.

My fundamental argument is that the former is more likely to guarantee the latter over the long haul. The wheel turns, winners and losers trade places. Agree to a set of rules that will maximize your gains but minimize your losses, and result in a society we all want to live in.

By the way – I’m curious to see how McCaskill approaches her clients (students) after this, and whether she’s both able to relate to them, and whether she’s able to regain a measure of trust among her detractors (although given that I remember college politics revolving around posturing 20 year olds, unfinished egos, and a lack of critical thought, I have my doubts). What a fascinating challenge. I’m curious to see whether she’s able to meet the task in the long run. It could present a remarkable civics lesson.

If a Christian college fired a staff member for signing a petition that supported gay marriage, the gay community would explode with rage. Yes, her job as a diversity coordinator does call things into question, and I do wonder how she’ll be effective with LGBT students after so many no longer trust her.

Then again, I would hate for my job to be dependent upon whether or not people “perceive” me to be a certain way, whether I am or not. Frankly, I’ve never seen much point in university diversity offices.

My bosses get to control more than 33% of my life – and I’m lucky, I have a great employer… there are folks with their pee breaks scheduled, who don’t get paid for overtime, who earn no benefits.

But as much as I like my job, I’ll be damned if I’m going to turn every last shred of my dignity and control over to them – whether through allowing them to decide what kinds of medical conditions they find morally acceptable to insure, what bumper stickers they deem suitable for my car… or what I do in my church, in the ballot box, or when confronted with a petition.

And I’m going to scream bloody murder when any of you all try to do it to me.

And please yes, that is precisely what you are arguing for when you advocate for her employer to have the right to step in on this issue. Because it is a double-edged sword, and you cannot predict where that kind of thing goes.

Anyone here remember how GSA groups earned the right to suit the crap out of schools that banned them?

It was when anti-gay Christian groups sued to have the right to meet on school grounds after-hours. The courts allowed it, provided the government remained neutral on content. The Christians never imagined that they were opening the door for desperately needed GSA clubs across the country.

So… what are you opening the door to here?

I think Ms. McCaskill is suffering from the same kind of delusion.