WHILE public attention has fixed on the trivial issue of whether Rush Limbaugh was wrong in calling law student (or is she a Dickens character?) Sandra Fluke a “slut,” little notice has been given to the remarkable defense of Fluke by Georgetown officials. President John DeGioia issued this statement Friday about a student whose principles are a direct attack on everything the school once stood for. For DeGioia, the issue of whether the government should force citizens to subsidize birth control is “a legitimate question of public policy.”

Dear Members of the Georgetown Community:

There is a legitimate question of public policy before our nation today. In the effort to address the problem of the nearly fifty million Americans who lack health insurance, our lawmakers enacted legislation that seeks to increase access to health care. In recent weeks, a question regarding the breadth of services that will be covered has focused significant public attention on the issue of contraceptive coverage. Many, including the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, have offered important perspectives on this issue.

In recent days, a law student of Georgetown, Sandra Fluke, offered her testimony regarding the proposed regulations by the Department of Health and Human Services before a group of members of Congress. She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction. She provided a model of civil discourse. This expression of conscience was in the tradition of the deepest values we share as a people. One need not agree with her substantive position to support her right to respectful free expression. And yet, some of those who disagreed with her position – including Rush Limbaugh and commentators throughout the blogosphere and in various other media channels – responded with behavior that can only be described as misogynistic, vitriolic, and a misrepresentation of the position of our student.

In our vibrant and diverse society, there always are important differences that need to be debated, with strong and legitimate beliefs held on all sides of challenging issues. The greatest contribution of the American project is the recognition that together, we can rely on civil discourse to engage the tensions that characterize these difficult issues, and work towards resolutions that balance deeply held and different perspectives. We have learned through painful experience that we must respect one another and we acknowledge that the best way to confront our differences is through constructive public debate. At times, the exercise of one person’s freedom may conflict with another’s. As Americans, we accept that the only answer to our differences is further engagement.

In an earlier time, St. Augustine captured the sense of what is required in civil discourse: “Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance. Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth. Let us seek it together as something which is known to neither of us. For then only may we seek it, lovingly and tranquilly, if there be no bold presumption that it is already discovered and possessed.”

If we, instead, allow coarseness, anger – even hatred – to stand for civil discourse in America, we violate the sacred trust that has been handed down through the generations beginning with our Founders. The values that hold us together as a people require nothing less than eternal vigilance. This is our moment to stand for the values of civility in our engagement with one another.

Sincerely,

John J. DeGioia

                                      — Comments —

Laura writes:

At Speak with Authority, Jeryl Bier writes that Limbaugh should have called Fluke a “propagandist” instead of  slut.

Daniel S. writes:

John J. DeGioia writes:

In an earlier time, St. Augustine captured the sense of what is required in civil discourse: “Let us, on both sides, lay aside all arrogance. Let us not, on either side, claim that we have already discovered the truth. Let us seek it together as something which is known to neither of us. For then only may we seek it, lovingly and tranquilly, if there be no bold presumption that it is already discovered and possessed.”

I would be interested in the source and wider context of this quote, as St. Augustine was as far from a nihilistic, relativistic liberal as one could get. St. Augustine, as both a Christian and a Platonist, believed in an absolute, transcendent Truth; he certainly would not argue that a Christian idea and an anti-Christian idea were equally valuable or deserved an equal hearing. One need only look at how harshly he spoke of the heretical Manichean sect.

St. Augustine of Hippo, Pray for Us!

Laura writes:

Possibly this quote is from the City of God. Augustine then would have been referring not to ultimate truth, but to  conditional truths regarding how to apply man’s duty to God in the civic sphere. DeGioia made it seem as if Augustine entertained the possibility that man has no duty to God in the civic sphere.

A Catholic university that makes no claim to having discovered the truth is a false and ridiculous institution.

Please follow and like us: