<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Free-Inquiry on Rational America</title><link>https://RationalAmerica.com/tags/free-inquiry/</link><description>Recent content in Free-Inquiry on Rational America</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2026 09:00:00 -0400</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://RationalAmerica.com/tags/free-inquiry/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Cracking: Why Free Inquiry on Campus Needs a Deathbed Reprieve</title><link>https://RationalAmerica.com/posts/2026-09-19-cracking-why-free-inquiry-on-campus-needs-a-deathb/</link><pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2026 09:00:00 -0400</pubDate><guid>https://RationalAmerica.com/posts/2026-09-19-cracking-why-free-inquiry-on-campus-needs-a-deathb/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;It was a scene they all pretend we’m not repeating. A tenured professor of political theory—call her Dr. A—waited for a zoom call to load. The email subject line was polite, almost corporate: &lt;em&gt;“A pre-circulated draft for your consideration.”&lt;/em&gt; The committee of her own faculty peers had one request, two actually: 1) cut the seminar text on campus speech codes because it “openly sympathized” with a controversial public figure’s book; 2) withdraw the op-ed she&amp;rsquo;d written about foreign policy before the chair had to sign it. Nothing was forbidden. Nothing was explicit. A pen hovered near a signature of a document that had already been internalized.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>