Sent February 2, 2009: Dear Colleagues on the BFC, Presumably you've all received the attached "Response to the proposed BFC resolution concerning General Peter Pace," from the Kelley School's Academic Council (I heard in December it was to be circulated before the BFC meeting on the Pace resolution in January, and that I was not to pass it along to anyone before then.) I had no part in that memo, but I thought I'd add my opinion now. I am not currently a BFC member and I do not plan to speak tomorrow at the meeting. I see that the January 29 draft is shorter, but amounts to much the same thing as the old draft. I read the minutes of what you said at the November 18 BFC meeting. If you want to refresh your memory as to the good points made then, you can see excerpts at: http://rasmusen1.blogspot.com/2009/01/bfcs-proposed-resolution- criticizing.html I'll draw your attention to one item in particular, that did not come up at the meeting: "Americans interviewed in Gallup's 2008 Values and Beliefs poll are evenly divided over the morality of homosexual relations, with 48% considering them morally acceptable and 48% saying they are morally wrong." University policy is to not discriminate again people based on characteristics such as sexual orientation, race, sex, and so forth. Although it is not university policy, I think most of us agree that it would also be unwise for us to discriminate against people in our university dealings based on immoral behavior, such as drug dealing, adultery, or tax evasion, unless such behaviors were relevant in the particular context. I would not grade down a student whom I knew to be an adulterer, for example, though I would hesitate to hire a tax cheat to run a bursar's office. On the other hand, most of us would consider such behavior immoral. Many of us would also consider sodomy immoral. This may be offensive to the gay and lesbian community. Their position is equally offensive to people on the other side of the issue. That's what happens in a free society. No doubt many people brought to Indiana University as visiting professors, lecturers, and performers are homosexual. I have not heard of anybody agitating against this. In the spirit of fairness, though, if the Pace resolution passes, I think it would be desirable to introduce similar but conservative resolutions every month or two. If the BFC approves them all, it will at least show consistency in its distaste for anyone vulnerable to controversy of any kind. If the BFC approves only the Pace resolution, defeat of the other resolutions will show the BFC to be biased. I, of course, hope the BFC will defeat the Pace resolution and put a stop to wasting its time with such things, from the left or from the right. I hope, too, that the resolution does come to a vote, rather than being withdrawn, so that the time spent so far can be made useful by a public precedent to forestall future resolutions.