Columbia doesn't host ROTC or (I think) military recruiters on campus, because it would be just too offensive to do so, because the military obeys the law passed by a Democratic Congress and signed by Bill Clinton which bars open homosexuals from serving in the military. OK.
But Columbia does host Ahmedinejad who heads a government which executes homosexuals for the crime of being homosexuals.
So it's obnoxious beyond belief to exclude homosexuals from military service, but it's not obnoxious beyond belief to hang them from the neck until dead.
I'm inclined to think that Congress and the military should rethink their policy of barring homosexuals from military service. It's a long argument, which I'll omit from this post. But I don't have any trouble joining the 99.99% of Americans who oppose execution of homosexuals for homosexual acts. And who think it's a barbaric act, incapable of being supported by any decent argument.
Why does [Columbia president] Lee Bollinger think a man who heads a regime that executes homosexuals--not just excludes them from military service, but hangs them by the neck until dead, in public ceremony-- should be honored with an invitation to speak at Columbia?
My argument against banning of gays from the military would be shorter and far more pungent than Barone's, but I reproduce his comments because this is something that baffles me. A while back, Harvard hosted Mohammed Khatami, former Iranian president and still a major power player, and he defended executing gays in front of his Harvard audience. Nobody stood up and yelled "Bullshit!" or even walked out. NOBODY. That astounds and revolts me. So does this: Amadinejad is a Holocaust denier, and supports executing gay people as public policy, but Columbia University is rolling out the red carpet.
My father once taught at Columbia. I'm ashamed to even have that much of a connection to them, now.