Apolitical? Engineers?
The U may have hit upon the only way to invite a controversial ultra-conservative speaker to campus without having him shouted down Horowitz style - invite him for a talk about the Riemann hypothesis. Writes National Review columnist and Andrew Sullivan nemesis (Sullivan not being a fan of his gay marriage opposition) John Derbyshire of his appearance at U of M Thursday, “Unless things have changed since my own college days, engineering students are the least political crowd on campus, except possibly for the medical students.” Indeed we were. Oh, and it’s pronounced “DAR-by-sher.”
But the question should be, ‘can politicians build bridges?’
posted by Jon on February 15th, 2004 at 10:06 pmWhy is the government in the marriage business anyway??
Talk about special rights for heterosexuals!
posted by local guy on February 16th, 2004 at 10:03 amPersonally, I think that “marriage” should be completely done away with at the government level. We should all be “civil-unionized” (w/ the rights currently allowed for married couples) not “married” by the government. Those who then so choose should get “married” in a religious ceremony that has nothing to do with the legalities. The churches/temples/mosques, etc. could “marry” (or not) whoever they want, and the rest of us can choose to join/leave religions based on whether we like their policies. Personally, I wouldn’t stay in a religion that wouldn’t allow gay marriage, but I really don’t care what other people want to do — as long as they don’t try to impose their small-minded and mean-sprited ideas on me and the people I care about.
posted by Anna on February 16th, 2004 at 1:16 pmThis is a bit off-topic, but some may find it interesting. I have an undergrad degree in engineering from UM, and I’d agree that most of my peers weren’t very political. Explore the multi-faceted engineering personality at your leisure, but don’t forget to apply some kind of socioeconomic filter to the data. When I was in school the engineers and b-school undergrads were more likely, it seemed, to be from lower socioeconomic levels than people in other schools (most notably Natural Resources… lotsa Trustafarians there). Quite often they were first-generation college students. They were more focused on school than other students and, understandably, viewed it mostly as a route to a “better” life at General Motors or Ernst & Young. The diag shanties, etc. were not necessarily something they found objectionable, but they just didn’t have much motivation or time to get involved.
posted by Kevin on February 18th, 2004 at 3:38 pmKevin, I think you’re right about a lot of that. I’m a sort-of first-generation college student myself. But I went to an engineering school as an undergrad, and I think there was less of the whole “get out of here and make a ton of money working for Megacorp” thing. Oh, they were still apolitical to the max, but they did engineering because they liked to build cool stuff. The ones who did dream of corporate success usually wanted to start their own companies.
I am relatively apolitical, but more out a continuing sense of moral, ethical and religious turmoil and uncertainty than anything else.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on February 19th, 2004 at 2:03 am