Politics and Graduation: Commencement Speakers and the UH Law Center
*Warning: uncharacteristic complaining ahead.
Consider this: You recently invested thousands of dollars and hours in an education. Your family supported you with love and prayers and encouragement--and of course, money. Mom and Dad and Grandma and the cousins are coming to recognize you on your special day.
Then the Dean of Students arranges things so the event will promote her personal agenda. It's not about you, your family, your accomplishments, or your future. This is her day, an opportunity to force a captive audience to listen to a speaker whose entire life symbolizes the single most polarizing subject in American life: abortion.
Whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, imagine how you would feel if a speaker on the other side were scheduled to speak to your family and friends at your graduation. This is your one chance to show them something of what graduate school has been like for you--and instead, they get to listen to political sermonizing on abortion.
This was the case in early 2001, when Dean She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken announced she had chosen Sarah Weddington as the commencement speaker for the University of Houston Law Center.
Weddington is the Texas attorney who (with a team from UT) chose the "perfect" Jane Roe from among a pool of unwed, pregnant, and otherwise troubled women. Once they had settled on Norma McCorvey, they proceeded to call the Dallas District Attorney, Henry Wade, and announced that their client planned to have an abortion. (What kind of lawyer does that?) Weddington also prepared for McCorvey's signature an affidavit swearing the child was the product of rape. McCorvey later said that was a lie.
Wade dutifully filed charges against McCorvey and Weddington appealed. The Supreme Court took up the case, and several years later published Roe v. Wade.
(McCorvey never did get her abortion, by the way. She claims to have been told she would, though Weddington had to know the legal process could never have moved that fast. The child was adopted.)
Although Weddington was appointed by Carter to some post or another, thirty years later she is still known for only one thing--her connection to abortion.
Thus many students were unhappy with the dean's choice of speaker, but passive. A smaller number was outraged and wanted She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken to schedule someone else. We have speakers all year long, more than one a week, they argued. Why does graduation have to be about abortion? Weddington herself had already spoken on campus that year. Couldn't She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken find a judge or some meritorious alumnus to speak? Was there no one out there that could talk benignly about the law and not risk offending half the people in attendance? As politicized as life at the UH law center is already, wouldn't it be nice to have some unity at graduation?
She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken scheduled a meeting with concerned students. She cried. She apologized for creating such a controversy. She had no idea people would react this way. She's new to Houston, after all. Oh, and by the way, should you protest at graduation, or wear black arm bands or put signs on top of the mortar board, or otherwise exercise your freedom of speech, remember I HAVE TO SIGN OFF ON YOUR FITNESS TO SIT FOR THE BAR EXAM. In other words, if the students were determined to protest, they risked destroying their entire legal career. Extortion? Has it come to that?
The flack hit the fan. The Houston Chronicle ran articles, editorials, and letters to the editor about the controversy. The paper quoted professors who lamented the fact that the school was turning out such poor attorney candidates. One prof said if the students were unhappy about Weddington, how could they ever represent a client with whom they disagreed?
That's just stupid. Forgive me for not putting it in legal terms. I lament that UH ever hired a professor who could make such a stupid argument. After all, enjoying your graduation--which you paid for--is completely different from representing a party in court. (Incidentally, such protests often swirl about Weddington's commencement addresses.)
In the midst of this, I--a lucky member of the class of 2002--wrote a letter to the editor of the Chronicle. It was printed. They spelled my name correctly. Everything else was wrong. I complained to the Paper and was told the Houston Chronicle frequently "rewrites" letters to the editor so that they represent the majority of the letters received. (Did you know that? Does the reading public expect letters to the editor to have been revised not only for grammar, but for content?) I thought it curious how perfectly my "re-written" letter represented the opinions the opposition accused those on my side of having. That is, they changed the letter, turning it into an easily defeated straw man. But they kept my name on it.
Anyway, the commencement went along swimmingly. No one protested. A year later, when I graduated, we had a speaker from NASA. I don't remember what he had to say, but we laughed a lot and he was wonderful.
And now-- the rest of the story. Remember the plea of She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken that she "had no idea" students would protest? We learned a few years later that she had brought Weddington to the commencement during her tenure at a previous law school. Students there had protested also, but to no avail.
So, if unhappy students will make poor attorneys, what do you make of a dissembling and deceptive dean? And whatever may have happened elsewhere, her claimed surprise at our reaction to Weddington is in-credible. No lawyer is that naiive and out of touch. She knew, she did not care, and she lied, cried, and pretended otherwise.
I'm sorry to say that I do not miss the UH Law Center. Yet, the people and the programs are generally quite good. If those who dwell in their ivory towers could find it in their hearts to extend a bit of tolerance, the place would be much better. It must be nice to be a tenured liberal professor and to tell yourself you are right about everything and that anyone who disagrees is beneath your contempt. I suppose the feeling extends even to the Republican lawyers and conservative firms that donate their hard-earned money to keep the professors employed.
P.S. On a positive note, She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken is out. On another note, my list of the truly great professors at UHLC:
Meredith Duncan
Seth Chandler
Johnny Rex Buckles
Joan Krause
Sidney Buchanan
the late, great Rosenberg
Doug Moll
Chris Martin (adjunct)
Robert DuBose (adjunct)
Whatever their politics, these are not in favor of forced conversions.
For a kinder evaluation of the tenure of She-Whose-Name-Not-Must-Be-Spoken, and a description of the admittedly daunting problems she faced (besides the one(s) she brought upon herself)--consider a brief blog by Christine Hurt, legal research and writing director while I was in school, and a woman who deserved a great deal more respect than students seemed willing to give.
Consider this: You recently invested thousands of dollars and hours in an education. Your family supported you with love and prayers and encouragement--and of course, money. Mom and Dad and Grandma and the cousins are coming to recognize you on your special day.
Then the Dean of Students arranges things so the event will promote her personal agenda. It's not about you, your family, your accomplishments, or your future. This is her day, an opportunity to force a captive audience to listen to a speaker whose entire life symbolizes the single most polarizing subject in American life: abortion.
Whether you are pro-choice or pro-life, imagine how you would feel if a speaker on the other side were scheduled to speak to your family and friends at your graduation. This is your one chance to show them something of what graduate school has been like for you--and instead, they get to listen to political sermonizing on abortion.
This was the case in early 2001, when Dean She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken announced she had chosen Sarah Weddington as the commencement speaker for the University of Houston Law Center.
Weddington is the Texas attorney who (with a team from UT) chose the "perfect" Jane Roe from among a pool of unwed, pregnant, and otherwise troubled women. Once they had settled on Norma McCorvey, they proceeded to call the Dallas District Attorney, Henry Wade, and announced that their client planned to have an abortion. (What kind of lawyer does that?) Weddington also prepared for McCorvey's signature an affidavit swearing the child was the product of rape. McCorvey later said that was a lie.
Wade dutifully filed charges against McCorvey and Weddington appealed. The Supreme Court took up the case, and several years later published Roe v. Wade.
(McCorvey never did get her abortion, by the way. She claims to have been told she would, though Weddington had to know the legal process could never have moved that fast. The child was adopted.)
Although Weddington was appointed by Carter to some post or another, thirty years later she is still known for only one thing--her connection to abortion.
Thus many students were unhappy with the dean's choice of speaker, but passive. A smaller number was outraged and wanted She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken to schedule someone else. We have speakers all year long, more than one a week, they argued. Why does graduation have to be about abortion? Weddington herself had already spoken on campus that year. Couldn't She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken find a judge or some meritorious alumnus to speak? Was there no one out there that could talk benignly about the law and not risk offending half the people in attendance? As politicized as life at the UH law center is already, wouldn't it be nice to have some unity at graduation?
She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken scheduled a meeting with concerned students. She cried. She apologized for creating such a controversy. She had no idea people would react this way. She's new to Houston, after all. Oh, and by the way, should you protest at graduation, or wear black arm bands or put signs on top of the mortar board, or otherwise exercise your freedom of speech, remember I HAVE TO SIGN OFF ON YOUR FITNESS TO SIT FOR THE BAR EXAM. In other words, if the students were determined to protest, they risked destroying their entire legal career. Extortion? Has it come to that?
The flack hit the fan. The Houston Chronicle ran articles, editorials, and letters to the editor about the controversy. The paper quoted professors who lamented the fact that the school was turning out such poor attorney candidates. One prof said if the students were unhappy about Weddington, how could they ever represent a client with whom they disagreed?
That's just stupid. Forgive me for not putting it in legal terms. I lament that UH ever hired a professor who could make such a stupid argument. After all, enjoying your graduation--which you paid for--is completely different from representing a party in court. (Incidentally, such protests often swirl about Weddington's commencement addresses.)
In the midst of this, I--a lucky member of the class of 2002--wrote a letter to the editor of the Chronicle. It was printed. They spelled my name correctly. Everything else was wrong. I complained to the Paper and was told the Houston Chronicle frequently "rewrites" letters to the editor so that they represent the majority of the letters received. (Did you know that? Does the reading public expect letters to the editor to have been revised not only for grammar, but for content?) I thought it curious how perfectly my "re-written" letter represented the opinions the opposition accused those on my side of having. That is, they changed the letter, turning it into an easily defeated straw man. But they kept my name on it.
Anyway, the commencement went along swimmingly. No one protested. A year later, when I graduated, we had a speaker from NASA. I don't remember what he had to say, but we laughed a lot and he was wonderful.
And now-- the rest of the story. Remember the plea of She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken that she "had no idea" students would protest? We learned a few years later that she had brought Weddington to the commencement during her tenure at a previous law school. Students there had protested also, but to no avail.
So, if unhappy students will make poor attorneys, what do you make of a dissembling and deceptive dean? And whatever may have happened elsewhere, her claimed surprise at our reaction to Weddington is in-credible. No lawyer is that naiive and out of touch. She knew, she did not care, and she lied, cried, and pretended otherwise.
I'm sorry to say that I do not miss the UH Law Center. Yet, the people and the programs are generally quite good. If those who dwell in their ivory towers could find it in their hearts to extend a bit of tolerance, the place would be much better. It must be nice to be a tenured liberal professor and to tell yourself you are right about everything and that anyone who disagrees is beneath your contempt. I suppose the feeling extends even to the Republican lawyers and conservative firms that donate their hard-earned money to keep the professors employed.
P.S. On a positive note, She-Whose-Name-Must-Not-Be-Spoken is out. On another note, my list of the truly great professors at UHLC:
Meredith Duncan
Seth Chandler
Johnny Rex Buckles
Joan Krause
Sidney Buchanan
the late, great Rosenberg
Doug Moll
Chris Martin (adjunct)
Robert DuBose (adjunct)
Whatever their politics, these are not in favor of forced conversions.
For a kinder evaluation of the tenure of She-Whose-Name-Not-Must-Be-Spoken, and a description of the admittedly daunting problems she faced (besides the one(s) she brought upon herself)--consider a brief blog by Christine Hurt, legal research and writing director while I was in school, and a woman who deserved a great deal more respect than students seemed willing to give.
posted by S. at
10:06 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home