People have defended the fired professor, Erika López Prater, on the grounds that she did not have “Islamophobic” intent. That is, she did not intend to criticize Islam or portray Muhammad in an unfavorable light; she was showing the image of Muhammad, which Shi’ite Muslims produced, in the context of art history. But what if she had intended to criticize Islam and to make a stand for the freedom of expression, even expression that gets one on jihadi death lists, in an appeal to stop kowtowing to violent intimidation? Why is it taken for granted that such a stand would be out of bounds in an academic context? There is no problem with speech critical of Christianity in academic settings. Why does this not hold true when it comes to Islam?
“Court Allows Religious Discrimination Claim to Go Forward in Ex-Hamline Prof’s Mohammed Images / Islamic Art Controversy,” by Eugene Volokh, Reason, September 16, 2023 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
As readers of the blog may know, Hamline University declined to renew Erica López Prater’s instructor contract because she displayed Islamic Art containing images of Mohammed in her World Art class, and some students objected. López Prater sued, and on Friday Judge Katherine M. Menendez (D. Minn.) allowed her religious discrimination claim to go forward (López Prater v. Trustees of the Hamline Univ. of Minn.):
Ms. López Prater alleges two theories of religious discrimination: 1) discrimination because she is not Muslim, and 2) discrimination because she failed to conform to certain religious beliefs of others (i.e., that it is improper to view images of the Prophet Muhammad)…. Although the Court appreciates that Ms. López Prater alleges unusual and somewhat indirect theories for religious discrimination, it does not believe that novelty in this context equates to failure to state a claim. Given the lens applicable at this stage, where a plaintiffs’ allegations are taken as true, dismissal is not appropriate.
Ms. López Prater may have difficulty proving her case at later stages, especially because demonstrating that Hamline would have treated her differently if she was Muslim seems very hard to establish. But the sole question before the Court at this stage is whether her allegations plausibly state a claim for relief, and Hamline bears the burden of dismissal….
Ms. López Prater maintains that Hamline would not have labeled the act of showing the images “Islamophobic” if she were Muslim. She also points to the temporal proximity between the uproar over her showing the images and Hamline’s decision not to renew her contract as suggesting a discriminatory motive. Exactly two weeks after Ms. López Prater met with Dean Kostihova and was told that there was a large outcry within the Muslim Student Association and Muslim staff were threatening to resign, she was notified by the department head that the spring semester class she had been scheduled to teach was being cancelled and that her contract would not be renewed. Ms. López Prater responded to that email, suggesting that the change must be related to her showing images of the Prophet Muhammad in class. The department head did not deny this suggestion. The continued description of her conduct as “Islamophobic” by members of Hamline’s administration suggests that it was a problem that Ms. López Prater did not conform to the belief that one should not view images of the Prophet Muhammad for any reason.
The information in Ms. López Prater’s complaint is sufficient to plausibly allege that Hamline took the adverse actions because she was not Muslim or did not conform to the religious beliefs held by some that viewing images of the Prophet Muhammad is forbidden. And while Hamline contends that Ms. López Prater’s non-conformance theory must fail—because she did not allege that Hamline itself held those beliefs—caselaw recognizes that an employer can discriminate against an employee if it acts on the preference of third parties such as customers or clients. Therefore, Ms. López Prater alleging that Hamline discriminated against her by acting on the preferences of certain Muslim students and staff members is sufficient at this stage….
Penman says
Muhamud suhamud…the woke degenerats are everywhere. I trust that the picture she showed was of a ginger Caucasian paedovile because that is precisely what the long dead reprobate was.
William Kemmler says
Erika López Prater should consider herself luck that all that happened was that she lost her job. Others found guilty of the same “crime” have met with more severe punishment from the islamic community.Charlie Hebdo comes to mind as a good example of what moslems are capable of doing when in their offended mode.
In the end I hope she wins her case and takes the University to the cleaners. But as this is Minnesota I doubt that will happen.
somehistory says
Today, one must apologize for having an opinion that coincides with the Truth of whatever is being discussed.
I was reading an article where the subject was ‘trans” thingys. The opposing view, that of the people who say there is no such thing as males becoming females, etc. is now the “controversial’ view of things. If people such as Carlos Santana say ‘women are women and men are men,’ it’s called a “rant.”
So, telling the Truth about islam and the goals of mozjums…to take over and make everyone in their evil image…is the “controversial” side and those who claim that mozlums are peaceful and only get angry on occasion…are the rational and inclusive, and tolerant nice guys, while calling everyone who disagrees, “racists.”
It will be a big surprise if she wins, but sometimes, right prevails.
Noah Andeark says
Serious question for the muslims here…..Particularly the terrorists at the terror org CAIR……..If someone displays a photo of dog or pig feces, how would one know that it’s not a depiction of the muslim prophet, the pig-faced dog, mohammed?
allahu’s snackbar!!!
OLD GUY says
Why is she fired and the University protecting islam from criticism ? Check the universities ENDOWMENT FUND for large contributions from Saudi Arabia or Qatar or other muslim countries that buy their way into our colleges and universities. Followed by muslim student Assoc. and muslim professors and chair persons. This firing is nothing but Islamophobia being used to silence anyone who says or shows islam in a bad light.