Darren Boon
“Crazy times” was what Leigh Pasqual described Dr Thio Li Ann’s appointment as visiting professor at New York University (NYU) on a Facebook note.
Dr Thio, 41, an ex-Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) will be teaching ‘Human Rights Law in Asia’ during NYU’s Fall 09 Semester under the faculty’s Global Visiting Professor of Law programme.
Dr Thio’s biodata on the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law website lists one of her teaching subjects as ‘Human Rights Law in Asia’. She has a keen research interest in ‘Constitutionalism and Human Rights in Asia’ and ‘International Human Rights Law and The Rights of Peoples’, and has written extensively on the issues of human rights.
Ms Pasqual, a Singaporean living in New York put up the note on her Facebook page after receiving a forwarded email about Dr Thio’s appointment sent out by OUTlaw. OUTlaw is an organisation for LGBT students as well as for LGBT supporters and friends, and “actively promotes queer visibility on campus and acts as watchdog for LGBT issues arising within NYU and across the globe”.
OUTlaw issued a board statement to condemn Dr Thio’s parliamentary speeches over her support to keep 377A as “intolerant” and “reprehensible”. Her statements raise “serious questions about her fitness to teach a course on human rights”. Yet OUTlaw also notes Dr Thio’s contribution to the field of academia and to her being “a fierce defender of minority rights”.
At the same time, OUTlaw has urged the law faculty to issue a statement to condemn Dr Thio’s comments in parliament and reassert the faculty’s commitment to diversity. However, the Board hopes to engage in “respectful and productive dialogue about the boundaries of human rights” instead of fighting Dr Thio’s offensive views by silencing her.
Meanwhile Ms Pasqual has through her Facebook note urged “any self-respecting NYU student” to question the appointment of Dr Thio by writing in to the Vice Deans of the faculty.
“I hope you will question this appointment of someone who openly supports the criminalisation of gay people, who professes to be an expert in the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) but fails to practise what it preaches, and who uses her evangelical beliefs to colour her application of the law,” Ms Pasqual wrote.
Ms Pasqual also highlighted Dr Thio’s mother Dr Thio Su Mien’s as the “mastermind” of the failed “coup” at AWARE.
Calling Dr Thio’s appointment an oxymoron, Ms Pasqual said that one could not be a good human rights lawyer while espousing the opposite of what human rights are about.
“As I said she also professes to be an expert on CEDAW. And one of the key elements of CEDAW is to ensure that countries’ constitutions adequately reflect the rights of people, including women and gay people,” Ms Pasqual said.
A lively exchange ensued over Ms Pasqual’s Facebook note. Nick Lum was one who defended NYU’s move. He argued that Dr Thio’s appointment was made possible because institutions in the United States favour a variety of dissenting views, arguments and perspectives to allow students to have a “full flavour” and understanding of different perspectives.
Mr Lum wrote: “To be fair, Dr Thio is a rather known human rights lawyer. It is only the one point on homosexuality that she allows her religion to cloud her rationality.”
He later added that it would be better to challenge Dr Thio’s faith rather than her credentials during her lectures so that she would be “able to see the light and contradictions in her actions”.
Tris Xavier, 25, doing a law pupillage said: “Dr Thio might be the closest thing we have to a constitutional law advocate in Singapore. Her view on constitutionalism comes the closest to the US view on it.”
Mr Xavier told Ms Pasqual: “I’d advise you to alternatively not allow your view of her religion-imposing, wrong as she was, to colour your view of her teachings.”
When queried by The Online Citizen over Dr Thio’s appointment, Jason Casell, Public Affairs Officer, School of Law, said that Dr Thio had been selected for the appointment based on her published academic scholarship, and not on the basis of her parliamentary statements in her capacity as an NMP.
“We believe that she will make a valuable contribution to our Global classroom and to intellectual life of the law school when she is here this fall,” Mr Casell said.
Noting that the Law school has a long record of opposing discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and for being supportive of the GLBT community, Ms Casell believes that there will be members of the faculty, staff and student body who will disagree with Dr Thio over the content of her speech.
“We expect a dynamic exchange on these issues. This is what makes institutions of higher learning so indispensable to our society — the ability to provide a forum for these kinds of exchanges,” he added.
Cary Nelson, national president of the American Association of University Professors, said that he would not advise NYU to rescind the invitation to Thio to teach there. But he said that it would be legitimate to raise questions about whether she should be teaching human rights.
“Academic freedom protects you from retaliation for your extramural remarks, but it does not protect you from being prohibited from teaching in an area where you are not professionally competent, and there are doubts on whether she has the competency in human rights,” Nelson said. He said that there is in fact an “international consensus, save a few countries like Iran” that gay people should not be treated as criminals.
——
Excerpts from Inside Higher Ed:
Should someone who teaches human rights back human rights for all people?
That’s the question being raised by some students at New York University’s law school, who are upset that a visiting professor in the fall semester, slated to teach human rights law, is Thio Li-ann of the National University of Singapore, an outspoken opponent of gay rights. Thio has argued repeatedly and graphically that her country should continue to criminalize gay sexual acts.
NYU OUTLaw, a group of gay and lesbian students at the law school, last week sent an e-mail message to all students drawing attention to Thio’s statements, saying that it was crucial to “raise awareness of anti-gay statements made by an NYU visiting professor” because “it is important for LGBT students and allies to be aware of her views in order to make fully informed decisions regarding class registration.”
Read the full article here.
From Above The Law:
Academic freedom is a beautiful thing, essential to our nation’s celebrated system of higher education. And, to borrow the words of Dick Cheney on gay marriage, “freedom means freedom for everyone” — including people whose ideas we might not like, or even find repugnant.
How far should academic freedom extend? That’s an issue being faced right now at NYU Law School. The following message went out to the law student community last week:
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
An excerpt from the article: When queried by The Online Citizen over Dr Thio’s appointment, Jason Casell, Public Affairs Officer, School of Law, said that Dr Thio had been selected for the appointment based on her published academic scholarship, and not on the basis of her statements she made in Singapore parliament as an NMP.
An interesting thought emerged in my head. Did Thio Li-Ann consciously omit her NMP position against the Repeal of S377A in order to secure a job at New York University?
I do believe that she can teach the aspects of human rights law not related to homosexuality. To put things in perspective, LGBT rights is not a large component of Human Rights. If NYU Law students feel so strongly about her visit – although it seems to only be NYU’s Pink Lobby that seems to feel queasy – then she should just be told to leave the teaching of LGBT rights to other lecturers who can deliver the politically correct version desired by this Lobby.
How can someone who didn’t even fight for human right in Singapore blatantly and in action tell the world what to do ?
Why did she close one eyes to Dr Chee’s case ? Isn’t Dr Chee human ? Please she is not even fit to become a human right lawyer if she couldn’t even do what she preach in her own country. Only talk academically but no action, what use of this high-paid elite ?
Daniel,
she is being called to teach lessons, not deliver a political manifesto.
She should be allowed, nay encouraged to go to NYU and face REAL student protest and a free(ish) media. That way, we’ll now how good she really is…I mean this woman could actually make arguments with no legal or scientific basis and still get her Law Degree – let’s see her try that outside of Singapore’s shores.
Let’s congratulate Thio Li-Ann on her appointment at NYU. She will be exposed to informed and well-meaning academic discourse over a diverse range of human rights issues.
“she is being called to teach lessons, not deliver a political manifesto.”
Whether political, whether about worker’s plight, it is still about human right. How can people even respect her if she could only talk but cannot deliver and has no known track record other than been of lackey of the establishment ?
“She should be allowed, nay encouraged to go to NYU and face REAL student protest and a free(ish) media.”
Well, I’m waiting for her to scream at her Ang Moh student and ask them to “SHUT UP AND SIT DOWN” just like her pappy master teach her.
hi Daniel,
that’s a good one! :)
she’s just a small fish in the ocean in NYU… :P
LGBT rights is not Human Rights…it is sickening the way these twisted LGBTs like to always twist words or terms to their advantage and think the whole world owes them their disgusting, wayward and freaky practices!!
Hi Xiao Mei #10,
Do you know that LGBT rights is not a new set of rights?
It is about achieving equality with heterosexual people:
1. Decriminalisation of sodomy [right to have sex]
2. Equalization of Age of Consent for hetero- and homo- sexual sex
3. Anti-discrimination law & public policy
4. same-sex marriage or civil union
5. homosexual parenthood and adoption rights.
Great job, Thio Li-Ann, I hope you will be strong and steadfast in teaching what real human rights is all about, and at the same time, expose and oppose the devious and shameful acts of these LGBTs and stopped them from further poisoning our next generation.
You will have many supporters in the States, and do not be fooled by these shameful LGBTs that they are a force to be reckon with…THEY ARE NOT, as the vast majority of Americans still support the “one Man, One Woman” family nucleus!!
Having the rights to reject the disgusting practices of LGBTs is our basic human rights as well, and no one can take that away from us under the disguise of linking LGBT rights with HUMAN RIGHTS!!!!
10) Xiao Mei,
Your remarks have already, proven yourself to be a tyrant apologist incapable of conscious thought. Your opinion, ergo, carries no weight.
Your remarks have already, proven yourself to be a hypocrite, typical of LGBTs, and incapable of understanding and realizing that it is also my basic human rights to reject wayward and unnatural sexual practices that seeks to poison my next generation.
Your crooked opinion is of the minority, and carries no weight at all in a society where the majority are thinking straight!!
The desire for abnormal, unnatural and freaky LGBT practices is not HUMAN RIGHTS! What’s next? Will BESTIALITY be consider human rights as well???
Xiao Mei, are you saying that gays are not human?
Stop being so narrow-minded. What you consider ‘abnormal, unnatural and freaky’ will eventually be recognised as normal. I hate to break it to you, but it WILL happen. It’s not because LGBTs have an ‘evil’ agenda, it’s because what they advocate is RIGHT.
Just like how the blacks were doing nothing wrong in fighting to be treated equally, because they were and are also HUMAN. Just like how women also fought to be treated equally, because women are human too.
I cannot blame or hate you for being narrow-minded, because you were born with it. Just like I cannot and will not hate anyone for being born the way they are, be they tall, short, fat, skinny, straight, gay, bisexual or transexual. We are all human.
Like mother like daughter. What does she know about human rights? What has she contributed to Human Rights in Singapore?? No one should pay ANY attention to her. Religious fanaticism have no place in civilised society.
The USA is failed and bankrupt nation. Congrats for her to go the a land of that flowed in blood, when countless millions of indigenous Indians have beeen slaughtered by European invaders over the centuries. It was pogrom, it was savage massacre. What abou the the US/Uk invasion and murder of millions of Iraqi and Afghanistans amongst others?? If she has any sense at all, she should be fighting for the rights of the American Indians and all oppressed peoples of the world and to stop the American empire from doing evil deeds.
“The christians, Alcaraz, according to the Natives lied. Best quote: “We came from the sunrise, they (the Christians) from the sunset; we healed the sick,they killed the sound; we came naked and bare foot, they clothed, horsed, and lanced; we coveted nothing but gave whatever we were given, while they robbed whomever they found and bestowed nothing on anyone.” page 128.
Cabeza de Vaca’s Adventures in the Unknown Interior of America (Zia Book)
http://books.livingsocial.com/books/25596-alvar-nunez-cabeza-de-vaca-cabeza-de-vaca-s-adventures-in-the-unknown-interior-of-america-zia-book
#5 Tang Ling, great comment!!! I really love what you said. Hit the nail in the bud. :-)
New York! Of all places to put her there! Ha, I wonder how she’ll react when confronted by openly gay people in the most diverse part of America.
Liverpool in Singapore 26 July
I think the discourse will make her dig deeper, entrench her more in the ways of the Bible ;)
She is teaching Human Rights Law in Asia. No one will argue against Human Rights, the issue here is what should Human Rights cover. She will serve as a good representative of Human Rights from an Asian prospective.
It will be meaningless to have someone who is conform to the western views of Human Rights to go to NYU as visiting professor. It will not provide the contrasting view intended to highlight the gap between the West and Asia.
It may give Dr Thio a cultural shock and open up her mind to different views on various issue.
While I find it an irony of the highest measure, true academic discourse is about engaging all views of the spectrum.
In this case, I believe it will be a positive engagement for both her and the NYU faculty.
I think it is good for NYU to appt TLA as a visiting professor. In a place like NYU, she will have to assert her pov and belief not just based on religions grounds. In SG, she can get away with such line of arguments because there are many MPs who share the same religions with her and the Christian rights are very vocal and supportive of her pov. However, outside SG, the view pt is very diff. And religious view has no standing or merit by its self. So I think this is a good move.
ahhh, what these american students don’t know is that our thio li-ann is perfectly capable of teaching human rights — from a Singaporean perspective.
yup. she can explain
-> why CSJ shld be persecuted vigorously
-> why a gathering of four people, oops, i mean ONE person now, shld be illegal
-> why we shld have only “objective and factual” political films
etc etc
Xiao Mei, you certainly have a right to reject others (in this case, LGBT), just like others can reject your views. Be that as it may, how would you like to be discriminated, harassed or denied opportunities for being who you are – a conservative Singaporean?
The majority-wins argument is a dangerous and (if I might add) lazy line of reasoning. It has been used for decades to justify slavery and misogyny (and increasingly, towards LGBT individuals). Following the majority does not give a person the moral authority or turn misinformed opinions into universal truths.
You may be disgusted by the thought of same-sex love but there will be those who find your cynicism equally disgusting.
to Arix
this is funny. so thio li-ann is not there to “deliver political manifesto”. neither is she advised to touch on LGBT’s rights.
gee, what is there left for her to lecture?
Ooh I would love to watch the students at NYU debate her. Sure, there were online rebuttals of her infamous speech but no one challenged her face to face on her arguments as yet. Love to see how she would defend herself.
Please post on youtube y’all! or at least post some transcripts…
26) CO2 on July 10th, 2009 10.08 am ,
I wonder if you are called to fight for the right of those people who have incestous or bestilaity sexual oreintation.What will be your response? Or you might have someone in the family who has such oreintation.
H2O, using bestiality and incest to equal LGBT issue is an old wife tale tactic. Surely we have evolved such line of argument by now hvg so many yrs of debating on this issue.
Get ur facts right. Countries such as UK and Germany that legalises same sex marriage does not legalises the practises of bestiality and incest.
There is no basis on your argument except to evoke disgust and irrational fear among readers. And TOC readers are much smarter than that. Practise this to your grandmothers. It will work better. Not on TOC platform. THese are smart/mature ppl we are talking abt.
btw people, please spread this link around. Say no to marital rape
http://www.notorape.com/
28) Jc on July 10th, 2009 10.33 am ,
Is it not about right? Sure , you have evolved into a LGBT and that explains why you are defending your right. My point is that all activists have self interest, agenda and you too.Talking about maturity you are certainly NOT.The reason is not enough pressure is put on the german and the uk to legalise incest and bestiality. I am surprised that you would oppose it if there is such activism. Rights!!! you talk cock and anus and soon you will will be advocating the incest because suddently if you have that oreintation. Check your home in case ther is one lurking behind your back
haha…sorry no one will touch my anus. Thks. Very ‘mature’, ur speech. very good. Continue ur old wife tale then. Grandma. By hvg a certain pov does not mean I am a lobbist or advocating something. It is informing others that there are others with a different ideas and pov. And asking you to substantiate with facts on ur old wife tale is the only right thing to do here. And so far, I hv yet to find any news that anyone will lobby for bestiality and incest. So ur argument that there is no ppl lobby for that is fallicious once again because even the LGBT will agree with u that Bestiality and incest are wrong. Come up from your cave la.
Guys… lets set aside LGBT issue and concentrate on this issue proper… It is about her appointment as a human rights lecturer.
I suppose, the parliament is the best place and platform to get your voices heard and felt… voicing an issue once in parliament is 100 times stronger than ranting in public or any other platform.
However, during her time as NMP, did we ever hear Thio speak up on human rights before? I believe she didnt, and this goes to show that she does not have any passions at all for human rights… nor advocating human rights part of her agenda as a NMP.
It would be interesting what answers she will give when she is enquired during her lecture on her failure to touch on human rights issues in her 2.5 yrs time as a NMP.
to H20,
Hey bro… I think ur views are too extreme.
You seems to think that those who are not dead against LGBT (like you yourself) must be an advocator or even a LGBT. Hey thats too narrow minded man.
Many people are neutral about it… and i suppose… many of these people speak up for LGBT is because they cannot stand the unrelentless and illogical bashing on LGBT by people like you.
Bro… learn to take things easy la… extreme ideology will lead to hatred which in turn will lead to violence… furthermore… we are talking about human rights here… there is no place for extreme ideology in human rights.
It is like preaching others the sin of slaughtering cow when she still openly practicing beef cuisine because that was her family favourite dish,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homophobe
32) Bird man on July 10th, 2009 11.18 am
I hope the students will debate her, and we will get a video/transcript of that debate.
Message from the Dean of NYU School of Law, Richard Revesz (sent 9 Jul 09):
TO: NYU School of Law Community
FROM: Richard Revesz
RE: Visiting Global Law Professor Li-Ann Thio
DATE: July 9, 2009
A number of students, alumni, and faculty have contacted me about the appointment of Li-Ann Thio as a visiting professor in our Hauser Global Law School program this fall. I want to take this opportunity to reaffirm the School of Law’s commitment to our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community and to our longstanding policy of non-discrimination, and to share with the Law School community some thoughts about the appointment.
We are rightly proud that NYU and the School of Law extended partner benefits to gay couples long before New York law mandated such benefits. We are rightly proud that in 1978 NYU Law School became the first law school in the United States to deny its career services to employers that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, and that in 1990 the Association of American Law Schools required accredited law schools in the U.S. to follow our practice. We are rightly proud that NYU Law School students and faculty were leaders in the suit by the Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights (FAIR) to challenge the Solomon Amendment, and that NYU Law School was one of the first law schools to join the FAIR litigation, and to do so publicly. We took these positions because as an institution we believe that a society that discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, or that tolerates such discrimination against qualified people, is not just.
We are also proud that we took these actions despite the fact that many individuals and institutions, at home and abroad, disagree with them. This point brings us to the appointment of Professor Li-Ann Thio under the auspices of the Hauser Global Law School Program.
The Hauser Program grew out of our early recognition that the practice of law has escaped the bounds of any particular jurisdiction, and that legal education must take account of the intertwined nature of legal systems. As with our institutional stand on LGBT rights, the program has made us a leader in legal education. At heart, the program seeks to expose our community to legal scholars who come from and have been shaped by their experiences in different countries, regions, and cultures. Needless to say, the value of the program would be seriously diminished if the visiting scholars all thought of legal issues in the same way. Much of the benefit of engaging with the world lies in confronting profound differences in viewpoint and experience. We can learn from these visitors, and–we hope–they can learn from us.
Whatever their areas of expertise or views, Global Professors’ appointments are decided on their record of distinguished scholarship and teaching and their ability to contribute to intellectual exchange within our community. So, while many in our community sharply disagree with, or are offended by, Professor Thio’s 2007 remarks to the Singaporean Parliament, it is important to bear in mind that she was appointed as a visiting professor based on her published scholarship, not on views she expressed as a legislator.
To be clear, the Law School categorically rejects the point of view expressed in Professor Thio’s speech, as evidenced by our early and longstanding commitment to end discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Yet we believe academic freedom requires that this disagreement express itself through vigorous, civil debate, rather than an attempt to suppress those views. We fully expect that Professor Thio will embrace the values of academic freedom as well, and be open to the kind of respectful conversation that marks a great institution of higher learning.
@Bird man (#32),
Actually, she did touch on human rights / constitutional law issues quite frequently during her NMP term — of course, much less than the prolific Siew Kum Hong.
For instance, she weighed in on the debates over the Films (Amendment) Bill and the Public Order Bill (the right to free speech/association), over the proper counter-terrorist responses as regards ‘Internationally Protected Persons’, over the rehabilitation of destitute persons under the Destitute Persons Act, over Singapore’s treaty obligations under CEDAW, over the current wage gap between men and women and Singapore’s obligations to the ILO Convention, over the setting up of an ASEAN Commission dealing with women’s and children’s rights, etc.
There is also little doubt that she is probably the leading local constitutional law scholar of the past 1-2 decades, and one of the key public international law scholars in Singapore as well (possibly the only one specializing in human rights law).
On the one hand, we assume that she will experience ‘real’ debate and will not be shielded artificially. But I think she will go there, live in her bubble, think everyone is stupid, then come back and continue with her nonsense. The problem I see therefore is that her profile would be raised but she would not have taken away the valuable learning points of such an experience.
Thus, I hold the view that bigots should not be offered any platform – big or small, and someone who allows their personal religious philosophy to transcend into whatever professional office they hold should never be taken seriously.
At the end of the day she’s not much different from an online troll who registers himself on a forum just to go in and talk crap about his pet peeve and diss a particular group of people. Just as how we ban and ignore trolls (specifically, we SHOULD NEVER engage them in dscourse), so should we ignore/ban her.
Let’s put our hands together to welcome , Birdman, Jc, La nausete and all other LGBT activists , all hailed from Singapore, to the podium to show us their LGBT antics uniquely Singapore. Of course, they will also deliver the keynote on human rights of the LGBTs. And, annnnnnnnnd, also the rights of the ‘less known sexual deviationists…..sorry not deviationists, my apology . people of other sexual inclination but certainly of some sexual orientation that deserves our empathy and consideration.
Being inclusive the club is open to anyone of any sexual oreintation. I emphasise , any sexual orientation. claps claps claps for our brudders from singapore.
41) H20 on July 10th, 2009 1.22 pm
“…I emphasise , any sexual orientation…”
well, you are certainly 100% correct, when you mentioned that it is ‘I’ (namely YOU) that is open to ANY sexual deviancy. lol
Jonah (#25),
Lots of things. She can still talk about Dr CSJ – would be interesting to hear her opinion. It is quite a jump, I have to say, to conclude that she supports the imprisonment of CSJ when we have hardly heard her views on the matter. Or is there any proof for that assertion.
There is always economic and social rights. She could talk about how China abuses labour – perhaps throw in a few things about Singapore’s oppression too – or about sweatshops in India. Job discrimination as well: hey, this happens to heterosexuals too.
How about having identity cards? (Americans and Brits are very touchy about having NRICs.)
SHe could talk about Burmese Junta gunning down Buddhist Monks. Or even Pharmaceutical Patents.
Honestly, the topic of Human Rights is so broad. To think that without LGBT rights, she would have nothing to lecture about, is really nonsensical.
la nausee (#39),
I think that the record you just cited is proof of her qualifications to lecture as a Professor of International Human Rights Law.
Birdman (#33),
FYI, the bashing goes both ways. *Sigh*
Hopefully, we can see some of the debate and comments in the debate. I too will find this very interesting. As mentioned, i am looking forward to TLA’s appt at NYU. And i do agree that everyone has a right to free speech. At the end, it is the basis that most oppose to.
Well H20 can hv his/her basing….jsut that none cares what he/she is contributing as it is baseless and just make him/her look bad. So let’s move on and ignore her and get to the issue on hand. As an academic, I do not think u really need to practise what you lecture. But you need to be objective when you lecture, for that is being professional. I used to have a Christian that teaches buddism for my RK. And she is professional and teaches with as much zeals as she can despite the fact that she is a christian. And that is true freedom but it is not as ‘free’ because the ownership is for TLA to show that she does not abuse it.
46) Kill-netizen?? on July 10th, 2009 1.39 pm ,
it is like asking me to explain the logic of LBGT sexual oreintation So you agree that such oreintation was there long time ago. Does it exist to day? Should we go out there and approve such orientation in the name of human right because there is such a thing? Surely , you guys have some kind of value system formed and influenced, shaped by you know what and who.
Against this system you judge behaviours, to decide whether it is right or wrong.
Your views are a result of this or you are not sure.
ASk God why there were not burned,.I don’t know. Ask MJ why he looked like a gay or rumoured and yet he fathered a few children.
Law and Justice may and may not necessarily be one and the same.
Moreover, how many people can “walk the talk” in real life; especially in the “political” arena in Singapore.
will wonders never cease?
and soon we’ll have loansharks teaching values of patience and forgiveness.
might as well hire hitler to teach basic human rights while they’re at it.
Arix, you’re missing the point. just because she can teach about everything else under the sun besides LGBT rights does not make her a qualified human rights teacher. Human rights law is a unified area of law that encompasses the rights of minorities, a subset of which is the homosexual rights movement.
It’s not about quantity of human rights knowledge li-ann has. It’s about a qualitative flaw in her grasp of human rights that allows her to claim that she’s a proponent of it while supporting the imprisonment of homosexual people. She is essentially claiming that these people are not people, and not deserving of the same rights and protections as anyone else. In fact, they need to be persecuted.
That she holds this one aberrant belief makes her unqualified to teach the human rights law, the fundamental tenet of which is that all men are born equal in dignity.
Can an excellent historian be a holocaust denier?
And honestly, you asking her to talk about the Burmese junta and pharma patents is just dumb. do you have any understanding at all about her academic writings? They have nothing to do with what you raised.
Instead, in a recent article for the singapore journal of legal studies, she has chosen to rehash the 377A debate in the context of limiting free speech on the internet.
I mean, how detached from reality are you exactly, that you want her to talk about everything that has nothing to do with her scholarship and strongest convictions?