Should Prof. Finnis be sacked?

Prof. Finnis is a very very old homophobe who teaches Law. Two postgraduate Law students want him sacked. They write-

In a seminar, if Finnis were to call being gay “evil” or liken it to bestiality, would that be done respectfully and without violating gay students’ dignity?

Sure! The guy is a Professor. He has shit for brains. His saying being gay is evil means 'you don't have to fuck me in the ass to pass this course'. That's a good thing coz there's only so many senile Professors you can fuck in the ass before you start wondering whether getting a Degree is really worth it.

Respect does not mean politeness. It means sincerity, good faith, and a genuine desire for the other's flourishing. A Doctor shows respect for her patient when she truthfully conveys her diagnosis even if this might violate the normal rules of politeness. Just recently my G.P told me I was 'morbidly obese'. A week later, another Medic stuck a tube up my ass. This was not polite. But it was respectful and not at all violative of my dignity.

Finnis thinks gay sex is evil. So did the Law in the UK when Finnis was a student. Some of Finnis's students come from countries where that is still the case. If I were a Commonwealth country where bestiality or some other form of sexuality is classed as 'unnatural' and therefore evil, it might be useful for me to hear Finnis talk on this topic- provided he does so sincerely and with professional competence. Why? I need to find holes in his argument.

How does it violate my dignity to listen to a very very old Professor talk the way he was trained to talk? It is a window into the past, unless, I suppose, one is unfortunate enough to be a native of a country which still upholds such obnoxious laws.

Ou4 two postgraduate students take a different view- they think a gay student's dignity is violated if he chooses to attend a seminar given by a very very old Professor with antediluvian views.

Clearly such students shouldn't become lawyers because their dignity would keep getting violated.

What about if Finnis says it politely and in suitably intellectual language – would it then be OK? We think the answer is still no. Those who argue otherwise seem to care more about the way people say things than the content of what they say. Such “respectability” arguments allow academics to hide behind intellectual language. If an employee at your local shop can be sacked for using discriminatory slurs, why should academics be able to get away with it because they use longer words?

Academics can also be lawyers. Students of law often themselves become lawyers. If it violates their dignity to hear certain types of arguments, politely and suitably expressed, in the academy, would it not still violate their dignity to hear it in the courtroom? Clearly, if they are at all concerned with their dignity, they should find some other line of work.