Dear Editor,
Kindly consider the following hypothetical scenario that, to me, could shed some light on the current Bain-Harris-Gomes-UWI-LGBT mess.
Let us suppose that a recently retired academic is rehired by the UWI as a programme manager and a physician/psychologist specialising in treating addicts of bamboo rum, fermented marijuana tea, double-boiled cocaine crack and mauby liqueur.
This UWI-executed programme, funded by non-university sources, is one aimed at promoting therapeutic services, in a non-threatening environment, to the Caribbean's community of (illegal) drug-takers.
Let us further suppose that this academic were to be called on to assist a Surinamese court of law by giving expert testimony in a case involving the constitutionality of Suriname's old, Dutch colonial-era laws which criminalise 'driving under the influence'.
Should the academic, an authority on the relevant pharmacological issues, debar himself from giving scientific evidence in court because of objections raised against his testifying by Alcoholics Anonymous, Drug Dealers Inc, Unlimit All Weeds Ltd, The Caribbean Basin Association of Automobile Associations, and the Paramaribo Brigade of Motorcar-Afflicted Dare-Devils along with most of its regional sub-branches, etc?
And should the UWI be allowed to sanction its employee, winner of the Enerplan Prize for University Teaching and Advanced Research, for presenting to the court of law his and related findings on the physiological and psychological outcomes of a surging Caribbean-wide epidemic of motor vehicle accidents which are statistically co-related to such use of illegal drugs?
And should one's response to these questions depend upon any credible allegation that the academic considers all auto racing, without seat belts, particularly while driving under the influence, risky and even reckless?
Dennis A Minott, PhD
Scientist
Is what's good for the goose also good...?
-->
Kindly consider the following hypothetical scenario that, to me, could shed some light on the current Bain-Harris-Gomes-UWI-LGBT mess.
Let us suppose that a recently retired academic is rehired by the UWI as a programme manager and a physician/psychologist specialising in treating addicts of bamboo rum, fermented marijuana tea, double-boiled cocaine crack and mauby liqueur.
This UWI-executed programme, funded by non-university sources, is one aimed at promoting therapeutic services, in a non-threatening environment, to the Caribbean's community of (illegal) drug-takers.
Let us further suppose that this academic were to be called on to assist a Surinamese court of law by giving expert testimony in a case involving the constitutionality of Suriname's old, Dutch colonial-era laws which criminalise 'driving under the influence'.
Should the academic, an authority on the relevant pharmacological issues, debar himself from giving scientific evidence in court because of objections raised against his testifying by Alcoholics Anonymous, Drug Dealers Inc, Unlimit All Weeds Ltd, The Caribbean Basin Association of Automobile Associations, and the Paramaribo Brigade of Motorcar-Afflicted Dare-Devils along with most of its regional sub-branches, etc?
And should the UWI be allowed to sanction its employee, winner of the Enerplan Prize for University Teaching and Advanced Research, for presenting to the court of law his and related findings on the physiological and psychological outcomes of a surging Caribbean-wide epidemic of motor vehicle accidents which are statistically co-related to such use of illegal drugs?
And should one's response to these questions depend upon any credible allegation that the academic considers all auto racing, without seat belts, particularly while driving under the influence, risky and even reckless?
Dennis A Minott, PhD
Scientist
Is what's good for the goose also good...?
-->