The Faculty Senate passed a resolution supporting freedom of speech and the faculty's right to academic freedom in its emergency meeting Tuesday at the Kiva Lecture Hall.
However, the Senate disapproved of professor Richard Berthold's comments he made in his Sept. 11 class that "anyone who can blow up the Pentagon has my vote."
After much discussion and changes to the original resolution, the Senate passed a revised version by a 17-1 vote while six senators abstained from the action. The resolution states that the Senate deplores and does not condone Berthold's comments. It also states that the Senate upholds all citizens' rights to free speech and its collegues' right to academic freedom. The Senate also affirmed its confidence in the University's disciplinary procedures regarding a faculty member's misconduct.
A point of contention for the senators was the language used in the initial resolution, which had the Senate supporting that Berthold not be fired for his comments. Some senators said they didn't like the tone of the language. Many of them asked that due process be an essential part of any resolution regarding their position. Sen. Terry Loring, from the Math Department, said he would rather the resolution state that the Senate opposes the Regents taking action against Berthold.
In a Sept. 26 press conference, Regent Richard Tolliver indicated he would like to see Berthold removed from the classroom.
Don Morrison, a professor emeritus from computer science, said that anyone who has read Berthold's column in the Daily Lobo should not be surprised by the comments he made.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
"If his behavior is unacceptable, we should have recognized it 10 or 20 years ago," he said.
History professor Donald Farber said when he read the initial resolution, it sounded supportive of Berthold. He said that he agreed that the resolution should instead express the faculty's affirmation of due process.
"I do not believe you should give this resolution, which will be read as strong, unequivocal support for a man who does, in my personal opinion, not deserve such support," Farber said.
The lone dissenter, Peter Pabisch of the Foreign Languages and Literature Department, said he found the resolution contradictory. Pabisch said had the resolution only addressed a faculty member's academic freedom, he would have voted for it.
"Here we are putting these two things together," Pabisch said. "We are principally allowing a colleague or any faculty member to say whatever they want. But when it comes to the specific issue and you ask, `Well, do you agree to this or not?' Well, that's a different question. We should have had two resolutions."
Prior to the emergency meeting, Provost Brian Foster released a statement giving his conclusion on what the proper procedure should be for a case such as this. He said the process would begin with him referring the matter to the chairwoman of the History Department, Jane Slaughter and outlining the concerns to her and Berthold. He then said that they would have a chance to discuss the issue and seek a resolution that would be acceptable to Berthold and the University.
If no such resolution is achieved, Berthold could then go to Reed Dasenbrock, the dean of Arts and Sciences, then to Foster. If the issue was still unresolved, it would go to the Faculty Senate's Ethics and Advisory Committee for an investigation. After completing its report and recommendation, Foster would decide if any disciplinary measures or other steps are warranted.
Beulah Woodfin said she believes the University has indicated that it will go through those channels.
"It's my feeling that in peacetime, short of yelling `Fire!' in a crowded theater is protected by the First Amendment," Woodfin said. "There are those who disagree with that, and in such a disagreement, there are venues that will determine whether or not such speech is protected."
Loring said he believed that cooler heads need to prevail and that the whole process ought to slow down.
"I think we could all use a week or three to all calm down before we decided," Loring said.
Meanwhile, Berthold was absent from campus today and will be for the remainder of the week as University police investigates matters relating to his personal safety. Lt. James Daniels, spokesman for the UNM Police Department, said the History Department and the Provost's office had received several obscene and threatening phone calls. Daniels said the department is investigating the matter.
In a Sept. 27 UNM police report, an unidentified person left a message on the provost's voicemail saying that if Berthold was not "ousted" from UNM within 24 hours, he would be after that. A separate Sept 27 UNM police report stated that the history department received obscene phone calls on Sept. 21, Sept. 26 and Sept. 27.
Berthold said the University is treating the threats seriously, although he indicated that he felt safe on campus.
"I feel secure, but I believe the campus police have a better handle on reality than I do," he said. "I am willing to go along with that assessment."
