Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

TISA: Distorted Religious Identity Divides GU

CONTEMPLATION IN ACTION

Published: Friday, September 14, 2012

Updated: Friday, September 14, 2012 10:09

Georgetown students hail from over 40 countries and have ties to nearly every identity imaginable, from ethnicity to religion, sexuality to political beliefs. At face value, the limits to campus dialogue are few. Yet in an era of divisive identity politics, what should be this school’s greatest strength has instead become our greatest weakness.

Georgetown is senselessly divided at the community level. De facto racial segregation is an accepted part of campus life. Political dialogue is often stunted and condescending. Social identity is club based, and limited resources have made these groups necessarily exclusive.

Of course, Georgetown is no stranger to division. During the Civil War, the student body dropped to 17 as hundreds of students enlisted in the Union and Confederate armies. Yet blue and gray became Georgetown’s colors after the war to signal the school’s regained unity, when soldiers on opposing sides began to walk the halls once again as a single student body.

Common purpose is the essence of our Catholic identity. It means we accept certain responsibilities by nature of matriculation: We agree to respect human dignity, help the poor, be conscious stewards of the planet and live in communal solidarity with one another.

Georgetown was founded as a university open to all faiths. Fr. John Carroll, S.J., emphasized the importance of interfaith dialogue at a time when the Catholic Church was far from supportive of dissenting opinion. Fr. Patrick Healy, S.J., who served as university president 90 years after Carroll, was born a slave in Macon, Georgia. About a century after that, in 1969, the College opened up to women.

And then, at some point, things got messy. Georgetown refused to recognize LGBTQ groups on campus until the administration’s hand was forced by federal courts in 1985. Student pushback on these issues brought scrutiny from above. The administration slowly but steadily began to protect itself by codifying its identity as a Catholic university in rules and regulations.

As a result of this continuing tension, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education ranked Georgetown this year among the nation’s worst universities for freedom of expression. Administrators’ responses — pointing out “free-speech zones” in Red Square and on individual doors in residence halls — imply that you better behave on the remaining 98 percent of campus property.

“Anti-Catholic” speech is often listed as a primary reason for the poor ranking. But this policy totally undercuts the Catholic principles of solidarity and community. It makes organizing large groups and outdoor demonstrations exceptionally difficult. During the “Out for Change” campaign in 2007, it resulted in the expulsion of any student wearing an “I Am” T-shirt from inside Healy Hall and Dalghren Quad.

What’s more, if campus dialogue centered on Catholic identity were a sincere value, restrictions on free speech would be unnecessary. H*yas for Choice, a pro-choice student group, has existed on the periphery for years. The group contributes in meaningful ways to an important campus conversation but is refused university recognition and relegated exclusively to the aforementioned “free-speech zones.” If Georgetown administrators and pro-life students believe, as I do, that the arguments against abortion are convincing, then they should not fear open dialogue with those who disagree. In fact, our Catholic identity calls us to participate in that discussion to open minds and soften hearts. The ban on H*yas for Choice delegitimizes the abortion dialogue and removes value from pro-life arguments in the eyes of those who are unconvinced.

For many Georgetown students, Catholic means “no.” No, because donors would be offended. No, because it risks the ire of the Vatican. No pro-choice groups on campus. No access to contraception. No openly gay groups, period. Yet by refusing to engage students in open dialogue on these issues, administrators undermine Georgetown’s founding principles and alienate students from our school’s Catholic identity.

We will not regain a lasting sense of community until we return to the trust and common purpose implied in our Catholic heritage.

Not all of the needed change lies at the university level. As individuals, we benefit from engaging others on new issues and in new ways. Challenge yourself to breach the established lines, whether they are social, political or cultural in nature.

Georgetown students have the potential to spark a major renewal of the university’s Catholic identity — properly understood. In a charged and divisive national environment, we can find in our roots a universalism that aims to teach, not dictate, foster understanding, not resentment, and remind us day by day why we found ourselves on the Hilltop.


Nate Tisa is a junior in the School of Foreign Service. He is transition chair of the GUSA senate. CONTEMPLATION IN ACTION appears every other Friday.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

7 comments

Anonymous
Wed Sep 19 2012 21:58
More specific examples would be appreciated but I think this is a wonderful piece. Very well done. It's not "anti-Catholic gibberish". Please note that the author embraces the Catholic identity of the school and is simply asking the school to represent the full spectrum of student opinions.

While the school is Catholic, it takes every opportunity to emphasize pluralism in religion and the fact that the student body is diverse. Well, if admitting to the fact that students hold different beliefs then should non-Catholic students have any less of a right to resources and free speech than Catholic students? From an educational point of view it doesn't make sense. You can't teach Catholic values unless you encourage others to voice their differing opinions first.

Anonymous
Tue Sep 18 2012 11:30
You should work to focus your writing a bit more. So often you speak in broad, sweeping statements that are either serving as a protection to yourself as to not offend anyone, or as a means of hiding yourself in generalizations. Don't try and be a voice for campus unless you are willing to focus down and take some ownership.
Anonymous
Tue Sep 18 2012 02:44
Another utterly hopeless piece of anti-Catholic jibberishm which has no place at what is supposed to be a Catholic school, from pages of the Hoya.

Georgetown and its pitiable students are cruising for an eternal bruising.

Anonymous
Mon Sep 17 2012 12:54
Given the nature of the subject (religous identity and free expression) I think this is a forrest where every tree is significant. (I'm thinking of the redwoods in Muir Woods National Park, each of which is probably important enough to the whole to be tracked by the Park Service.) "Access to benefits" could mean a lot of things, some of which I would find more objectionable than others. To me it all comes down to earmarked incremental expense. If someone has to write a check or mark a ledger allocating X dollars to a club whose sole purpose runs contrary to Catholic teaching, I think it crosses a line into a zone where a Catholic university can reasonably say it won't allow it. But if we're talking about bulletin boards, access to classroooms, access to newspapers and airwaves that any individual student or group of students can use without the university incurring any incremental expense, I would argue that academic freedom requires that they be given access. I know this is a fine line, but I also believe it real and important one.
Anonymous
Sat Sep 15 2012 02:51
@Anonymous:

From what I understand H*yas for Choice is very restricted. They can't reserve rooms, do not have access to benefits, and can only assemble in the "free speech zones." Also let's not forget that WGTB's one rule is you can't say "condoms," "contraception," or "birth control" on air.

Don't lose the forest for the trees - it's a divisive issue and the school says no without any explanation. Nothing is learned and it just gets frustrating.

Anonymous
Fri Sep 14 2012 18:08
I don't understand how any of the policies you object to in this column restrict free speech or open dialogue. Maybe someone can enlighten me. If H*yas for Choice or an individual student who is a member of that organization wants to host a speech or discussion in a classroom some evening, are they allowed to reserve the room and do so? I'm assuming they are, but am I wrong? If the same group or individual wants to post flyers on university bulletin boards advocating abortion rights, isn't this allowed? Aren't they allowed to publish pro-choice opinion pieces in The Hoya and the Voice? I understand that Georgetown refuses to directly subsidize such an organization, but does Georgetown really censor it? Unless I am wrong about these things, I think you are confusing tolerance of advocacy against Catholic doctrine with direct subsidy of such advocacy. There is a big difference. As far as I know, Georgetown's doors are wide open to expressions of dissent against Catholic doctrine. The only thing the university won't do is earmark funds specifically for such advocacy.
Anonymous
Fri Sep 14 2012 15:38
Props.




log out