<< Or to put the same questions another way: if a physical anthropologist
were
>denied grants to do comparative research on the brain sizes of black and
>white women or if this anthropologist were disallowed in a required
course
>of 500 or so people from insinuating the case for deep biological racial
>differences in cognitive ability on the basis of a putatively failed head
>start programme while not equipping his students *in this physical anthro
>course* with even a basic understanding of human genetic variation or
>recent research in the interaction between nutrition, cellular
development
>and neurological sequencing--would Chomsky or others here consider such
>grant or course denials a dangerous violation of free speech?
>>
No. It's certainly not a constitutional right to have protected speech funded, and even if you think it would be good policy were more money available for various weird ideas to be prmulgatred, there's a qualitative difference between saying: Say taht on your own time and money, and saying: Say that and go to jail.
--jks