I don't find it acceptable for political speech in public place to be squelched, nor do i find it acceptable for an adult to assault a child. But, if you want to claim the protection of juvenility, you can't also assert that person's right to free speech, since said rights have not been activated by the individual's entry into citizenship viz. the attainment of legal adulthood. what i find repugnant is the conflation of marketability and knowledge production. I haven't read hardly anything in this thread, I, rather, point out that there are massive inconsistencies on both sides. you can't attack a professor based on the fact of her scholarship's marketability; the point of an academy is to produce knowledge in every conceivable direction, not to create neat little worker-bees that fit nicely into the corporate structure--round pegs in round, well exploited holes. the ad hominem attacks on this professor, based on her scholarship, rather than her actions, are atrocious. If you have a problem with her squelching the anti-abortionists, you must also allow her scholarship as the freest form of expression. it is as free as the protester's expression.