I read about this story first at the Chronicle of High Education's news blog. But the blogosphere is humming with the story. Cal State has fired an adjunct faculty member at cal state fullerton, Wendy Gonaver, because she refused to sign an oath to "defend" the constitutions of California and the United States "against all enemies, foreign and domestic."

And here I though Joe McCarthy was dead.

The instructor in question, Wendy Gonaver, is "a Quaker and a lifelong pacifist," according to the Chronicle's story. In other words, her religious beliefs prevent her from signing the oath. Another faculty member was fired in February after altering the oath by adding the word "nonviolently" to it. That person was rehired because the media attention surrounding the issue. Too bad they weren't rehired just because the U.S. Constitution probably prevents them from being fired over their religious beliefs. Part of the irony is that Gonaver teaches in the school's American Studies program.

Some notes from the blogosphere...

• From McCombover: People For the American Way Foundation answered the call to defend core constitutional values when we heard about Wendy Gonaver, a woman in California who lost a teaching job at Cal State over the "loyalty oath" she was required to sign. Wendy, a Quaker, was willing to sign as long as she could attach an explanation that she wasn't committing herself to take up arms in the Constitution's defense and to assert her belief that the oath undermined her free speech rights. Even though California's other major state university has a common-sense policy that respects employees' religious and free speech rights, Cal State refused and fired her. Intervening on Ms. Gonaver's behalf, People For the American Way Foundation has provided her with legal representation and called for her reinstatement, asked the university to adopt a policy similar to the University of California's...
• From The Grackle's Nest, in response to Cal State's assertion that this is not a case of discrimination because everyone is required to sign the oath: It's not discrimination because all employees are required to sign it?! What utter nonsense. That doesn't mean it's not discrimination, you towering boob. It just means that there are more cases of discrimination out there. (Though admittedly, I think that the discrimination issue is secondary here: my primary objection is forcing a teacher to take the oath in the first place. It's nationalistic crap.)
• From Sheffield Quakers: Although Quakers are no longer being publicly hanged or dragged and whipped through the streets as they were in 17th century Massachusetts, they are still being persecuted and discriminated against because of their religious beliefs in 21st century America...
• From Sarah at Gnomicon: ...it's bizarre and objectionable that California still has this type of loyalty oath for state employees...
• From Athens and Jerusalem: Communism may be dead, but the oath requirement lives on, and is today being used to prevent religious folk with controversial beliefs - such as pacifism - from securing employment. We think this is not only outrageous, but a bit silly as well. There's no place for loyalty oaths in a liberal democracy for the simple reason that pacifism and patriotism are not mutually exclusive.