‘Appalled’ by Stuart School cancellation

Denise J. Ramzy, Stuart graduate
To the editor:
    As a Stuart Country Day School alumna, I am appalled by the school’s recent decision to disinvite Christine Todd Whitman to speak at a “Women in Leadership Forum” and cancel the planned Oct. 6 event.
   This last-minute decision was made at the request of Diocese of Trenton Bishop John Smith because Whitman’s beliefs regarding abortion are not in line with Roman Catholic teaching. The forum was one in a series that has included speakers such as political commentator Cokie Roberts and Princeton University President Shirley Tilghman; it represents the PreK-12 private school’s tradition of balancing its Sacred Heart values with a desire to provide a full and competitive education to women of all faiths.
   I take issue with the bishop’s reasoning that the invitation “may well mislead your students, parents and faculty to falsely conclude that the Church tolerates the pro-choice position.”
   As an educational institution, Stuart has a responsibility to take seriously the values of academic freedom, to educate and prepare its students for the broad range of beliefs and experience they will encounter in the world, and to protect the rights of the administration and faculty to create programming for those purposes.
   Inviting someone with whose views you disagree is by no means an endorsement of those views; quite the contrary, it often generates dialogue. Disappointed parents, students and faculty can and will argue that former Gov. Whitman was chosen to speak from her experience as a leader and that her views on abortion are irrelevant at best, but the primary problem with Stuart’s action is that it is rooted in an exclusionary value system. If the school can’t invite someone with pro-choice views to speak, can it invite someone with pro-choice views to teach? Will it allow parents with pro-choice beliefs to send their children? What does this stance say to pro-choice Stuart students about whether they are welcome in the community or whether the community respects their views? The exclusion of a high-profile guest based on her personal views draws a line that cannot be established consistently, and is therefore dangerous in its implications.
   What is most disheartening is that this rash decision flies in the face of two key Sacred Heart goals: “to educate to a deep respect for intellectual values;” and “to educate to personal growth in an atmosphere of wise freedom.”
   Surely Stuart women come away from their education with the strength and wisdom to sort through the many competing beliefs and voices they encounter in the public forum, whether sponsored by the school or out in the world. What a shame —and disservice — it is to expose them only to individuals whose beliefs fall squarely in line with those of the Roman Catholic Church. Academic discourse is, after all, about dialogue, dissent and, ultimately, respect. Thoughtful discourse is particularly needed in this groundbreaking election year, where access to information in order to make wise decisions is paramount. Stuart’s decision is a blow both to academic freedom and to women everywhere.
Denise J. Ramzy
Stuart Country Day School
Class of 1996