LEADER 04441oam 2200649Ia 450 001 9910778394703321 005 20190503073341.0 010 $a0-262-26150-2 010 $a1-282-09912-4 010 $a9786612099120 010 $a0-262-26673-3 010 $a1-4356-0598-5 035 $a(CKB)1000000000479491 035 $a(OCoLC)191934647 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebrary10194154 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000239343 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11220791 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000239343 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10239777 035 $a(PQKB)10464554 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC3338740 035 $a(OCoLC)181027482$z(OCoLC)191934647$z(OCoLC)473707608$z(OCoLC)487749583$z(OCoLC)607736509$z(OCoLC)614989145$z(OCoLC)636234582$z(OCoLC)636234596$z(OCoLC)647663802$z(OCoLC)722602937$z(OCoLC)728045491$z(OCoLC)961528619$z(OCoLC)962583259$z(OCoLC)974193222$z(OCoLC)974469313$z(OCoLC)988437121$z(OCoLC)991950469$z(OCoLC)992110169$z(OCoLC)1018050727$z(OCoLC)1037912482$z(OCoLC)1038682979$z(OCoLC)1041667892$z(OCoLC)1045534972$z(OCoLC)1058018742$z(OCoLC)1063970484$z(OCoLC)1081236890 035 $a(OCoLC-P)181027482 035 $a(MaCbMITP)7509 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL3338740 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10194154 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL209912 035 $a(OCoLC)181027482 035 $a(EXLCZ)991000000000479491 100 $a20071109d2007 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurcn||||||||| 181 $ctxt 182 $cc 183 $acr 200 10$aRomance in the ivory tower $ethe rights and liberty of conscience /$fPaul R. Abramson 210 $aCambridge, Mass. $cMIT Press$dİ2007 215 $a1 online resource (185 p.) 300 $aBibliographic Level Mode of Issuance: Monograph 311 $a0-262-51592-X 311 $a0-262-01237-5 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references and index. 327 $aThe romantic conscience -- Liberty of conscience -- Liberty of conscience and the U.S. constitutional archives. 330 $aShould the choice to engage in a faculty-student romance be protected or precluded? An argument that the right to choose a romantic partner is a fundamental right of conscience, protected by the U.S Constitution.Allen Ginsberg once declared that "the best teaching is done in bed," but most university administrators would presumably disagree. Many universities prohibit romantic relationships between faculty members and students, and professors who transgress are usually out of a job. In Romance in the Ivory Tower, Paul Abramson takes aim at university policies that forbid relationships between faculty members and students. He argues provocatively that the issue of faculty-student romances transcends the seemingly trivial matter of who sleeps with whom and engages our fundamental constitutional rights. By what authority, Abramson asks, did the university become the arbiter of romantic etiquette among consenting adults? Do we, as consenting adults, have a constitutional right to make intimate choices as long as they do not cause harm? Abramson contends that we do, and bases this claim on two arguments. He suggests that the Ninth Amendment (which states that the Constitution's enumeration of certain rights should not be construed to deny others) protects the "right to romance." And, more provocatively, he argues that the "right to romance" is a fundamental right of conscience--as are freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Campus romances happen. The important question is not whether they should be encouraged or prohibited but whether the choice to engage in such a relationship should be protected or precluded. Abramson argues ringingly that our freedom to make choices--to worship, make a political speech, or fall in love--is fundamental. Rules forbidding faculty-student romances are not only unconstitutional but set dangerous precedents for further intrusion into rights of privacy and conscience. 606 $aFreedom of expression$zUnited States 606 $aLiberty of conscience$zUnited States 610 $aSOCIAL SCIENCES/Political Science/Public Policy & Law 615 0$aFreedom of expression 615 0$aLiberty of conscience 676 $a342.7308/58 700 $aAbramson$b Paul R.$f1949-$0543892 801 0$bOCoLC-P 801 1$bOCoLC-P 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910778394703321 996 $aRomance in the ivory tower$93827895 997 $aUNINA