4 Responses to Duck AD Rob Mullens paying Nevada $650K for today’s body-bag game

  1. Fishwrapper says:

    Budget crisis? That’s peanuts compared to selling out your institutional values. I was surprised I didn’t see this here when it popped up in the Weekly: UO pays a megabuck to a notorious discriminator against gay students

    Then again, I’m not sure the AD would understand the notion of a moral or ethical failing, either.

  2. Conservative Duck says:

    Fishwrapper, wait, who has the morals here? The University that stands for its religious principals or the University that will take your money no matter what your personal fetish is?

    Are you on the side of Sodom and Gomorrah?

    • Fishwrapper says:

      Good question. As reported in the article,

      …Oregon requires both contractors and subcontractors to not only commit to non-discrimination but also “to take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment individuals without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability or veteran status.”

      Sure enough, a quick search of the UO site reveals that UO’s standard terms and conditions state that all contractors

      shall abide by the requirements of 41 CFR 60-1.4(a), 60-300.5(a) and 60-741.5(a). These regulations prohibit discrimination against
      qualified individuals based on their status as protected veterans or individuals with disabilities, and prohibit discrimination against all individuals based on their race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or national origin. Moreover, these regulations require that covered prime contractors and subcontractors take affirmative action to employ and advance in employment individuals without regard to race, color, religion, sex,
      sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, disability or veteran status.

      Note: The bold is the only bold section in the terms and conditions document; the emphasis is mine.

      So, toward your question: BYU can do whatever the hell they want on their campus. The choice to stand on their religious principles, their chosen moral path, and create their environment of bigotry – that’s their right. As a private school, they have even more leeway and opportunity to create that bigoted space, complete with a constitutional protection to do so.

      UO, on the other hand, does not operate in the same spheres as BYU. Different states with different state constitutions and state laws make it an uneven comparison; then, too, is the ridiculous notion of comparing a private institution to a state institution – far more different than the choice between apples and oranges. As a public university, UO’s institutional opportunity to practice bigotry is very diminished compared to BYU’s.

      While I fundamentally disagree with the bigoted stance of BYU, that’s their right. One reason they don’t get my money, and why their recruiting of a family member went straight to the recycling bin.

      My personal fetish, on the other hand, is that public universities that say they stand for something follow through on the words they put on paper and in public statements. Sodom and Gomorrah, in this case, are the athletics enterprise – writ large, not just on the UO campus, though in this case, the twin cities appear to be located at 2727 Leo Harris Pkwy.

      So, finally, to directly answer your closing question: No.

  3. Self-funded Ducks says:

    How much did we pay Auburn? And are Ducks paying Montana too?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.