A Professor has a dilemma. Her lock step impulse to be a good liberal fascist has run afoul of her responsibilities as a teacher. She bemoans her fate and appeals to fellow fascists so that she can rationalize her behavior.

A professor, writing anonymously does not want to endorse a student applying to a teacher credential program. The article is a little sparse on details. Apparently the letter is resume padding, nice to have but not a requirement. The professor could provide the letter, or decline and suggest the student go elsewhere.

I am not sure I see the issue if this is contest for writing backhanded recommendations I have a couple. Using the professor as a model, I offer a couple of lines that may serve her needs.

“Initially Professor ______ presents well as a conscientious mentor to her students, it is only upon closer examination that Professor _____ demonstrates the ethics and reasoning ability of pond scum.”

“There is no evidence that Professor _______ possesses the talent of Helene Bertha Amalie “Leni” Riefenstahl however, her attitudes indicate she would have been by her side, every step of the way.”

These letters may not accomplish the ultimate purpose but serve as a warning to other decision makers. Nothing I have seen undermines the student’s basic competence. The students failure, in the teacher’s eyes is the fact that she is a firearms enthusiast. This is not disqualifying.  In fact, that this is an issue, calls into question the Professor’s judgment and ability to fairly judge her student’s knowledge, skills, and abilities.

It appears from the article that the sole issue for rejection is that the professor objects to the student’s activities centered around the legal use of firearms and her desire to obtain a concealed carry license (CCL). 

The student screwed up.  She thought she was taking an education course taught by a competent individual.  She let it be known that she had other interests outside the narrow focus of the class.  That was her mistake.  She is now the subject of retaliation for pursuing a lawful activity in a legal manner. She has exposed this alleged flaw to an individual who will use whatever illegal, or unethical means necessary, at her disposal, to retaliate. The ends justify the means.

I can’t help but wonder, would this Professor be experiencing this much angst if the student had indicated a distinct preference for Pedophilia?