George M. Dennison
President, The University of Montana
[Editor's Note: This statement appeared as a "Guest Column" in The Missoulian, Thursday, 13 February 2003, B5. At the request of the editors of The Montana Professor it is printed here, with the permission of President Dennison.]
During the last few days, I have received letters, telephone calls, and other forms of inquiry about events that have occurred or will occur on the campus of The University of Montana. The focus of attention has varied from a conference held on campus last summer with participation by a variety of student, faculty, and community groups, to the performance of "The Vagina Monologues" on the campus under the sponsorship of a recognized student organization. In virtually every instance, those who wrote, called, or raised questions expressed the clear preference that I take action to prevent the events, or that I should have acted to prevent the events from occurring. In every instance, I have responded with the statement that I cannot act as requested and still respect my responsibility as President of a public university. Perhaps a few comments will suffice to explain.
To do so, I will use the most recent group of inquiries about the performance on campus of "The Vagina Monologues." The Women's Center, an approved student organization on campus, made the arrangements for the performance. Moreover, to assist with supporting the performance, the Center sought and secured the involvement of and donations from individuals and groups within the Missoula community. Any funds raised by the performance will go toward the effort to end violence against women, the purpose of staging the performance in various places across the country and around the world--certainly a most laudable and highly desirable objective.
Many of those who objected to the performance may not know that the play has been performed during each of the last three years in Missoula, and will also be performed this year in Bozeman, Billings, Butte, and Kalispell. It has also been presented on more than 500 campuses and in 500 cities across the United States and in 59 countries around the world. Its popularity as measured by performances certainly does not in and of itself render it exempt from criticism. However, the purpose of ending violence against women certainly puts the play and its performance in a different perspective. Whether I or anyone else agrees that it serves that intended purpose, nonetheless those responsible for presenting it, have that noble end in mind. Moreover, they planned and prepared in ways that assured dialogue and discussion of this important issue in our society. The University of Montana has an obligation to maintain freedom of opinion and expression on the campus. As President, I do not have the authority to dictate the views and opinions that students, faculty, and staff entertain. Nor can I censor their expressions of those views, so long as they respect the rights of others to express their views as well.
I do not hold up some individuals and groups as heroes and some as goats. Nor do I interfere with open and free discussion of a range of viewpoints, so long as the discussion remains open and free. I do take action to prevent harassment from occurring on the campus, without regard to the viewpoint of the harasser or the person or group harassed.
I must also point out that any action against one person or group requires similar action against all others. To that end, I do not suppress viewpoints, but instead work actively to protect the rights of all members of the campus community to freedom of association and freedom of expression, so long as they abide University policies and accord respect to others who differ with them. In that regard, the annual Prayer Breakfast sponsored by student groups on campus receives the same protection as the performances arranged by the Women's Center or the conferences planned and conducted by other groups, although nearly all of them attract a considerable number of complaints and requests for action. You may recall the recent controversy concerning a conference sponsored on campus by several student and community groups that focused on globalization. Although the conference sparked controversy, that does not warrant or justify any effort to suppress the views expressed by the participants.
In my view, every public university has the responsibility to assure an open and free environment for discussion on its campus. That does not mean that the university sanctions any and all views, but rather that it promotes open and free discussion in the interest of allowing truth to prevail. Academic freedom means freedom from constrained belief, and the freedom to learn from discussion and debate of conflicting viewpoints. We have developed this tradition in the United States because we have learned from the experiences of other countries that forced agreement has dire consequences. As Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson stated some years ago, "Compulsory unification of opinion achieves only the unanimity of the graveyard." Whether I agree with the variety of opinions expressed on this campus matters far less than that I make certain of the right to express those opinions, and the rights of others to disagree and to learn from the discussions that ensue.