Academic Bill of Restrictions Sample Letters to the Editor

Sample LTE #1

For me, the key to learning is the free exchange of ideas between students and faculty. I love the debate that sponsors new ideas, pisses someone off, or challenges something I've never thought of before.

That's why David Horowitz's so-called "Academic Bill of Rights" is so dangerous and will dumb down our education. It's a politically motivated attempt to curb learning on campus. Rather than promoting a free marketplace of ideas, Horowitz's bill would reduce our education to little more than fact regurgitation.

No thanks, Mr. Horowitz, I'm not interested. I want a classroom where I can really learn, and the last thing we need is some guy with an agenda trying to stop all the ideas he disagrees with. Let us do our own learning, come to our own conclusions, and make up our own mind about what's right and what's wrong. That's what I'm in college for.

Sample LTE #2

In arguing for the Academic Bill of Restrictions, David Horowitz and his followers claim to be protecting students from indoctrination and intimidation. Come on! Is Horowitz trying to claim I won't be able to understand organic chemistry because a professor makes a joke about politics? Is he claiming I'll be so intimidated by a professor telling me who they vote for that I'll drop English 101? Is he claiming that I'll become an atheist simply because my Geography professor is?

We're smarter than ABOR's proponents will give us credit for. I came to this university because I wanted an education, not fact regurgitation. That means getting into debates, learning a lot about many topics, and learning how to deal with someone who disagrees with me. College is about a free exchange of ideas and the Academic Bill of Restrictions would stop that exchange from happening.

Sample LTE #3

Though proponents of the so-called "Academic Bill of Rights" claim to be defending students from widespread "indoctrination" and discrimination for their political beliefs, there is precious little evidence to back up their claims. This January, ABOR's main proponent, David Horowitz, again had to admit he made up his stories of a problem.

A quick glance at the "complaints" posted by students on his web site reveals a lot of sour grapes and hurt feelings, but not much indoctrination. We've got enough problems - tuition is too high, we're losing valuable services - the last thing we need is some guy's political agenda stopping us from having a chance to learn. Thanks, but no thanks Mr. Horowitz - I prefer to learn this year in class, take your restrictions someplace else.

Sample LTE #4

One of the largest problems with the Academic Bill of Restrictions is that it would allow students who don't want to be exposed to ideas they disagree with to drag their professors through the mud, potentially getting the university to censure them. This would easily scare other professors into restricting what they teach and what is open for discussion in class to avoid a witch hunt. [Insert your personal story: use your personal story, for example a class you had where you learned from a professor because they presented a controversial idea or because the topic opened the class to lively discussion.]