{ title: 'The Prospector (Helena, Mont.) 1916-2015, September 22, 2005, Page 3, Image 3', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about Chronicling America - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-09-22/ed-1/seq-3.png', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-09-22/ed-1/seq-3.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-09-22/ed-1/seq-3/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-09-22/ed-1/seq-3/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
About The Prospector (Helena, Mont.) 1916-2015 | View This Issue
The Prospector (Helena, Mont.), 22 Sept. 2005, located at <http://montananewspapers.org/lccn/TheProspector/2005-09-22/ed-1/seq-3/>, image provided by MONTANA NEWSPAPERS, Montana Historical Society, Helena, Montana.
Shades of By Brent Koning Guest Writer I was asked to write a piece about what I think of the situation regarding the “Science at the Edges of Humanity” lecture and how Dr. Trebon withdrew the invi tation to one of the guest lecturers; the coordinator for volunteer serv ices for Planned Parenthood. There are two overall problems that arise out of this whole situa tion. The first problem is the president of our college uninviting someone that is coming to our school to speak. The second is the issue of Planned Parenthood com ing to speak at our Catholic Diocesan school. It is my opinion that we have the responsibility to decipher the two issues. As with any corporation, the CEO, president, chairperson and leader of that respective organiza tion should have the ability to give direction to that corporation regarding what happens at that corporation if he or she deems it fit, or (as with this case) contra dictory to that organization’s mis sion statement. This excerpt comes from the handbook of Carroll College under the subheading Speakers and it supports Dr. Trebon’s deci sion. “Only registered student organ izations, academic departments, faculty and administrative staff may extend invitations to outside speakers to appear on campus under college auspices... The col lege reserves the right to refuse to host any speaker whose message violates the mission, vision or val ues of Carroll College (CC Handbook).” Dr. Trebon was hired to preside over Carroll College along with the Board of Trustees, the Bishop in conjunction with the senior staff and more importantly within the boundaries of the mission state- * ment of Carroll College. That is Dr. Trebon’s job. Gray Faculty Voice in “Humanity” controversy When there is a gray area, it is his responsibility to determine if the umbrella of academic free dom really applies or if it contra dicts what we stand for as an insti tution. People sometimes forget that he was formerly a professor ASCC President Brent Koning and underestimate his ability to make decisions as the head of the college -and- as a full-professor here at Carroll with 30 years of teaching experience. It is proba bly one of the single most difficult decisions he has ever had to make, not a hasty decision that was made irrationally. The second issue is having Planned Parenthood on campus. This choice is something that is very complicated and when it comes down to the true basic prin ciples and beliefs the Catholic Church and Planned Parenthood have - they clearly disagree. And there is no way the Associated Students of Carroll College, nor Carroll period, could endorse an organization such as Planned Parenthood for an activity, such as a lecture. It goes against the fun damentals of our school. My point is that Dr. Trebon did what he was hired to do - make decisions. It was a very contro versial decision that didn’t make everyone happy, but it is his obli gation as the president of Carroll College. by Dr. Jonathon Matthews Guest Writer “Science at the Edges of Humanity” explored ethical issues raised by current practices in sci ence and medicine, providing us with opportunities to apply our powers of reason and personal conscience to an examination of the moral judgments we make when confronting the dilemmas that science and medicine have thrust upon us. The official teach ings of the Catholic Church on these beginning and end of life issues were well presented at this conference, providing all who attended an excellent opportunity to explore these more deeply. Additionally, as our Mission states, Carroll’s “commitment to the principle of freedom of inquiry in the process of investigating, understanding, critically reflecting upon, and finally judging reality and truth in all fields of human knowledge” caused the organizers of this conference to include par ticipants who took positions on these matters that are different from those taken by the Catholic Church. This was appropriate, as our Mission statement commands us to hear from any who take a significant position on the topic being examined, in faithfulness to the principle of freedom of inquiry. Had they been faithful to our Mission statement, the Carroll College administration would have supported the opportunity for those attending the conference to apply their powers of reason and prior moral teachings to make appropriate judgements, based on the totality of the evidence pre sented at the conference. Unfortunately, as reported in the Helena Independent Record, the administration banned one of the invited individuals from participat ing in a panel discussion. This action violated freedom of inquiry, the fundamental tenet of academic life so eloquently embraced by our Mission statement. Additionally, this action violated the other key principle of academic life, aca demic freedom, fry keeping us from hearing a voice, in a diverse panel format, that Dr. Barry Ferst- -the primary organizer of the con ference-had judged was important to his academic project, the critical examination of beginning and end of life issues. Unfortunately, the negative con sequences of our administration’s actions will likely be significant. Several community members have told me they decided not to attend the conference because of our administration’s violation of aca demic ethics. Others have told me they are no longer going to con tribute financially to Carroll. But the biggest harm to all of us is the potential destruction of the reputa tion of Carroll College as a place of serious, genuine inquiry, unblinking before the problems of the modern world. With this' destructive act, Carroll College has become a place where the administration wields the power of censorship to quash controversial debate, making us appear to cower before the challenges of the mod ern world rather than addressing them with critical acuity, wisdom and compassion. Students, staff, faculty, and community members: no is the time for all who care about the integrity of our college to make your voice heard! Controversy surrounding ‘Humanity’ conference by Ann Goldes Intern writer “Science at the Edges of Humanity,” a conference recently held at Carroll College, did not come and go without receiving its fair share of attention. A large part of the attention stemmed from a decision made by President Thomas Trebon to withdraw the invitation from one member of a panel. While some applaud Trebon’s choice, others are calling it censorship and even going so far as to proclaim it to be the silenc ing by authorities of a perspective with which the Catholic Church disagrees. “I am not silencing any voice, there are numerous voices being heard at the conference and I cele brate that Carroll College has invited all of these diverse voices to be heard,” said Trebon. He emphasized that Carroll is not and never has been a place where only Catholic values are welcome. “Carroll is a place where dialogue from a diversity of opinions and positions are welcomed,” he said. The invitation was withdrawn from Planned Parenthood panelist Sara Frederickson. “The foremost reason for my action is that Planned Parenthood’s primary work as an organization contra dicts Carroll’s mission as a Catholic Diocesan College. I believe that the foundational val ues of Carroll College as expressed in our mission statement -and certainly the values of the Catholic faith-are opposed to Planned Parenthood’s position on the sanctity of human life, expressed in their provision for and advocacy of abortion servic es,” said Trebon. Dr. Trebon stressed that it was not the topics to be discussed that were the problem but what Planned Parenthood actively stands for and what it is involved with. “They are involved with activities that violate our institu tion as a Catholic college. I find it unacceptable for Carroll to spon sor the major participant for abor tion,” he said. Trebon does, how ever, recognize that there are many things that Planned Parenthood contributes to the community in the health services area. “This is not an issue of freedom of speech or academic freedom. The conference enabled and more Controversy on page 15 THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 VOLUME 89, NO. 1 -- ------------- - .» ■ .. » . ............... ..................................... .............................................. ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... L m im ii ___ I _____ — ____ iS __ i l i , V ____ !_1 ________ • __________________________
