Plans for Gov. Bobby Jindal’s upcoming prayer rally are drawing criticism from the LSU Faculty Senate.

When students and faculty come back from winter break Jindal will host “The Response,” a prayer rally in the PMAC on Saturday, Jan. 24. The University cannot deny the PMAC from any group who pays the rental fee.

“Thus, the University may not have the authority to prevent the use of this facility by its sponsor, the AFA, which, as readers of the newspapers know, has voiced a variety of views that seem inconsistent with the goals and aspirations of a great university,” LSU Faculty Senate President Kevin Cope said in an email.

Cope said “The Response” event conflicts with the University’s values as it is partially paid for by the American Family Association, a religious group opposing LGBT rights and gay marriage. Cope wrote the prayer rally associates the University with intolerance.

“…Faculty Senate representatives have stressed that the “Response” event both damages the University and conflicts with its values, whether by associating intolerance with University venues or interfering with the goal of disseminating the best in science,” Cope said in the email.

At the next Faculty Senate general meeting, Thursday, Jan. 22, two resolutions regarding the prayer rally and intolerance will be discussed.

Given the controversy surrounding “The Response,” the Faculty Senate will also co-sponsor with the LSU System public forums to address similar issues of free speech and University Relations’ role with political groups and hate groups.
Cope said in the email he is in contact with LSU President F. King Alexander about security during the rally for protestors and attendants and hopes to see a constructive outcome to the controversial event.
The full text of Cope’s email is below:

TO: LSU FACULTY SENATE; LSU FACULTY SENATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE; and LSU SYSTEM COUNCIL OF FACULTY ADVISORS
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
Over the last few days, the Faculty Senate has received a great many comments regarding the January 24th event at the PMAC (“The Response”). Many colleagues have expressed deep concern about the effect of this event on the campus community and have wondered what action the Faculty Senate and the administration might be taking. I would like to provide you with a summary of the matter and also to let you know about some plans that have emerged from discussions with the senior administration in the LSU System office.
First, the facts. For better or worse, both state law and the first amendment appear to require the opening of the PMAC (or any other public facility) to any group that can pay the rental fee. Thus, the University may not have the authority to prevent the use of this facility by its sponsor, the AFA, which, as readers of the newspapers know, has voiced a variety of views that seem inconsistent with the goals and aspirations of a great university. It is true that the University may cancel events that pose a direct threat to an institution or to public safety, but it does not appear that, as of the writing of this letter, the administration has been able to demonstrate that this event meets the criteria for such a cancellation.
The Faculty Senate has made use of its extensive media resources to focus public attention on this matter. Faculty Senate leadership has appeared on several talk shows; will be doing a television appearance this evening; and has obtained its supply of column inches in an assortment of newspapers (and their online equivalents), ranging from the Advocate to the Chronicle of Higher Education. In all of these interview opportunities, Faculty Senate representatives have stressed that the “Response” event both damages the University and conflicts with its values, whether by associating intolerance with University venues or interfering with the goal of disseminating the best in science. LSU Faculty members are also preparing two resolutions, one dealing with “The Response” and one dealing with tolerance, which will be debated at the next general Faculty Senate meeting.
The Faculty Senate leadership has also engaged in extended conversations with LSU System President King Alexander, who, to his credit, has demonstrated a higher level of engagement with the faculty than any previous System leader. The wide-ranging conversations with President Alexander have covered topics such as security for the campus during a highly controversial occurrence; provision for the presence and protection of protestors; proper charges for the hosting of such an event; and, most important of all, the seeking of a constructive result from what many regard as a fiasco. With regard to the constructive result, the Faculty Senate is pleased to announce that it will be co-sponsoring, along with the LSU System, one or more public forums or “town halls” in which the LSU community may address issues such as tolerance; free speech; hate groups; relations between universities and public pressure groups (to name but a few topics). Announcements regarding these events, to be developed through collaboration between the Faculty Senate and the LSU administration, will be forthcoming.
In addition to the foregoing, there are many other topics and issues that have arisen from this uncomfortable experience. Owing to “the Response,” colleagues are now thinking earnestly about whether the nominal head of a state agency such as the Governor ought to support events that work against the missions of those agencies and are wondering about whether involvement in such an event by a member of the Board of Supervisors is ethical or appropriate.
The story of “The Response” is far from over, but I do want to assure the LSU and the statewide higher education community that the LSU Faculty Senate is working vigorously to assist the administration not only in repairing the damage resulting from this event but also in using it as an educational, formative opportunity.
With best wishes,
KEVIN
Kevin L. Cope