The research centre for intercultural studies of the University of Cologne, has recently published an opinion on the freedom of Science. It reads the “For freedom in research and teaching” overwritten Text, is expected to be a defense of the Right of all members of the University, free of ideological barriers and scientifically unfold. Exactly this individual freedom is the right of the five ten initiators of the opinion but a thorn in the eye. If it is not, therefore, the protection of freedom, what do you do then?
Obviously, therefore, research questions, and to not displace arguments from the universities, with their belief in harmony. The attack brought the justification is as follows: limits of freedom are necessary to combat discrimination and dehumanizing Utterances and the human and fundamental rights in such a way to defend. Concrete examples of “discriminatory and dehumanizing Statements” are only called in one place. The more significant the above-mentioned examples disclose the belief and goals of the author group. The example sentences are “The Islam belongs to Germany” and “The headscarf is a sign of oppression”.
opinion the not-too-lightly
With discrimination and contempt for people be to serious legal and ethical-moral guns to de – legitimise inopportune Statements when not under the protection of the freedom of expression and freedom of Science falling. dismiss The author group, but goes a step further and tries to be an activist motivated instrumentalisation of fundamental rights. Like many other anti-racist activists take to in article 1 and article 3 of the basic law to the visor. So you suggest that a sentence such as “The headscarf is a sign of oppression” constitutes a violation of article 1 enshrined human Dignity and a violation of the article 3 enshrined equality of the sexes and the prohibition of Discrimination on the basis of Religion.
criticism of Islam and of specific Islamic practices is collected in this way, in the rank of a human and fundamental rights violation. Accordingly, the author’s group claims, with her concept of world view compatible research and teaching “for the human and fundamental rights” advocate. It speaks, also, the expertise to know exactly which statements are in breach of fundamental rights; the all, which could cause members of “vulnerable groups” sense of injury.
to guarantee that, Ultimately, such a notion of research and teaching freedom is that freedom is abolished in the basic legal sense, the freedom of feeling injuries for vulnerable groups – seem to all Muslims. The University is not a place of free thinking and knowledge aspiration, but a world Outlook of a certain Safe Space, in the protection of the arguments, but the protection from the arguments, research and teaching would shape.
