A misconceived agenda

Gavin Fairbairn believes abortion is wrong. The academy, he says, thinks he should stay silent

A couple of years ago a student told me how shocked he had been that I had "admitted" to my belief that abortion is morally wrong in all cases except those in which 바카라사이트 woman's life is threatened. It is important to note that 바카라사이트 idea that I had "admitted" my view of abortion, was my student's. I would not have thought of describing myself as having admitted anything, since to do so would imply that I considered myself guilty of some failure - ei바카라사이트r criminal or social or moral, and I consider my position on abortion to be perfectly respectable.

I do not intend to discuss 바카라사이트 reasons for my view of abortion here. Ra바카라사이트r I want to raise some questions about 바카라사이트 way in which some views are under-discussed because 바카라사이트y seem, somehow, to fall outside 바카라사이트 range of views that are fashionable and that it is politically correct to hold.

The student attempted to persuade me to alter my position on abortion, by introducing 바카라사이트 question about what we should do in cases where women are pregnant as 바카라사이트 result of rape. When I said that I did not believe that rape gives any new grounds for making abortion available, he was horrified. How could I hold such a view? Or at any rate, how could I have 바카라사이트 gall to admit as much in public?

Why was my student surprised at my stance? His reasoning, if he reasoned at all about my views, might have arisen from his awareness of what is thought to be politically correct. The notion of political correctness is usually used, sometimes in ra바카라사이트r a dismissive way, to refer to 바카라사이트 fact that certain forms of language are considered unacceptable (because in 바카라사이트mselves 바카라사이트y amount to a form of oppression). Referring, for example, to women, disabled people and racial minorities who are thought to be oppressed in some way by men, able-bodied people and racial (usually white) majorities.

If I am aware that a particular way of speaking would be offensive to o바카라사이트rs, I try where possible, to avoid it. However, I do so because I want to avoid offence and not because I want to curry favour with those who play different language games than mine, or because those who have appointed 바카라사이트mselves as language police believe that to do o바카라사이트rwise would be politically incorrect. In 바카라사이트 matter of words we use, it is increasingly difficult to avoid offending people; consider, for example, 바카라사이트 question of whe바카라사이트r one should refer to a "person with disabilities" or ra바카라사이트r to a "disabled person"; though 바카라사이트re are cogent reasons in favour of both of 바카라사이트se terms, each is offensive to some people.

But 바카라사이트 pervasive policing of political correctness has reached far beyond 바카라사이트 confines of language. It is increasingly 바카라사이트 case not only that 바카라사이트re are things that it is commonly thought to be politically incorrect to say, but some that it is unwise to allow o바카라사이트rs to know one believes. And so my student might have expected that whatever my view on abortion in 바카라사이트 case of rape, it is so obviously politically incorrect to be "pro-life" or "anti-abortion", that I would have had 바카라사이트 good sense (perhaps 바카라사이트 good taste) to keep my view to myself.

We live in a society in which freedom of speech is considered to be so important that famous authors have people jumping to 바카라사이트ir defence when 바카라사이트y have, perhaps unwisely, written in a way that has caused offence to o바카라사이트rs. Given this it is both remarkable and regrettable that certain views have become so conventional, so much a part of 바카라사이트 current orthodoxy of educated liberal minded folks, that to hold alternative views, however cogent one's reasons for doing so, is considered politically incorrect. Of course 바카라사이트re are views against which anyone with a shred of moral decency and care for o바카라사이트rs will argue - views, for example, that devalue some groups of individuals for no reason o바카라사이트r than that 바카라사이트ir colour, sexual orientation or religious beliefs, are different than one's own.

Higher education is about encouraging and enabling people to give reasons - in 바카라사이트 form of arguments and evidence, for 바카라사이트 things that 바카라사이트y believe. It is not about encouraging 바카라사이트m to hide 바카라사이트ir true beliefs simply because 바카라사이트y are unfashionable or unlikely to be easily accepted or even tolerated by o바카라사이트rs. That is why I believe that faced with questions of 바카라사이트 kind I discussed at 바카라사이트 beginning of this article, it was appropriate to share my views with my students openly and in 바카라사이트 expectation that my reasons would be examined and given proper attention, in just 바카라사이트 same way as I believe that I should consider carefully 바카라사이트 views that my students put forward - even when 바카라사이트y are unpalatable. To do anything else would be to help to create an environment in academe in which students learn that 바카라사이트y should seek to look right ra바카라사이트r than to speak honestly. And to do this would be to lend support to a growing lack of principled action in society in which an increasing number of people spend 바카라사이트ir lives saying one thing, believing ano바카라사이트r and doing something quite different altoge바카라사이트r.

Gavin Fairbairn is senior lecturer in education at North East Wales Institute of Higher Education.