premeditated killing (murder), kidnapping, sorcery, bestiality, adultery, homosexuality, and cursing one's parents (Ex. 21:14; 21:16; . . .  God commands the judge to evaluate the crime rather than the criminal. If the crime is one for which God requires death, then death must be the punishment. Your eye shall not pity.”
”Your Eye Shall Not Pity” Credenda/Agenda Vol. 3, No. 9 http://www.credenda.org/old/issues/vol3/magi3-9.htm

Confronted with these statements, University administrators will find scant support among students, faculty, and staff of the University of Idaho who are African-Americans,  Native Americans, women, gay or lesbian, (and by logical extension, their family and friends across the state of Idaho and the nation).  A Campus Climate Survey conducted in 2002 noted:

 

“ … several groups among the students and staff, reported that they perceived the climate as less favorable to them, including African-Americans, Native-Americans, sexual-minorities, and members of the LDS church and non-Christian religious minorities. “

DIVERSITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO:

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR ACTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY

http://www.webs.uidaho.edu/hrco/DivPlanFinal4-20-04.pdf   p 35.

 

Students, faculty members or staff will be justified in claiming that the University is failing to provide for their safety and freedom from harassment if a thousand supporters of Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Wilson’s philosophy converge on campus.  It is ironic that the people who work and study on campus may need protection from a group who historically belittles and mocks  “government schools,” and repeatedly publishes articles critical of the values the University of Idaho claims to uphold;  that is, affirmative action, democratic government, and appreciation and respect for cultural difference.

 

            Citizens of Idaho understand that their tax dollars support the institution.  For the most part they understand that free speech, however repugnant, is central to a democracy. Attorneys and members of the judiciary may appreciate the case law sustaining First Amendment rights but it is doubtful if the majority of people who foot the institutional bills, who fund scholarships, or who contribute to endowments will share that intellectualized enthusiasm if they are the targeted by  bigoted, inaccurate, and cruel remarks, which in effect are sponsored by the University of Idaho.  There is a significant gap between protecting First Amendment rights, and sheltering and promoting hate speech - a gap which donors are able to recognize.   Administrators at the University of Idaho are asking employees and friends of the University and citizens of Idaho to endure defamation of this country, and ethnic and religious bias in exchange for thirty thousand dollars.  When will imprudent administrative financial decisions cease to be associated with the University of Idaho?