Last year, Marquette University, a Jesuit institution in Milwaukee, came under scrutiny for withdrawing an employment offer for the position of Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences from Jodi O'Brien, a lesbian sociologist who has written about gender and sexual identity issues.

According to a May 2010 article from The Chronicle of Higher Education, Marquette University claimed that the withdrawal of the job offer was due to concerns about how some of her scholarly writings related to the school's "Catholic mission and identity."

Nancy E. Snow, a philosophy professor at the school, commented that she believed the withdrawal was motivated by fears of upsetting donors to the school who would not be pleased with a lesbian faculty member in such a position of power.

At Brandeis, we frequently have similar crises of upsetting donors, although our crises involve the definition of our Jewish identity and our relationship to Israel.

These crises are not healthy, as they force us to choose between our collegiate identity and our financial interests.

Such crises include the addition of pork and shellfish to campus cafeterias by then-President Evelyn Handler in the late 1980s and the invitation of former President Jimmy Carter to talk about the Middle East on campus.

Brandeis was founded as a Jewish-sponsored university with the intent of accepting and accommodating all qualified students regardless of religion, race or gender and providing them with a comfortable learning environment. Additionally, Brandeis maintains a thriving Jewish student population and a phenomenal Near Eastern and Judaic Studies academic department.

However, that identity should not be used to create expectations about the University's politics. It would be inappropriate for a university to formally adopt a political position and alienate anyone in disagreement.

Looking back at various events on campus, donors have responded negatively to matters that possibly compromise the University's expected pro-Israel and Jewish identity.

When Carter spoke at Brandeis in 2007, groups such as the Zionist Organization of America called on donors to reconsider contributing to Brandeis.

One donor couple even wrote a letter to the Justice describing their disgust at Carter's visit and declaring that they would reevaluate their future support for Brandeis.

In the 1987-88 academic year, former Handler proposed that the dining halls on campus attempt to "internationalize" and begin to offer pork and shellfish to students in addition to the non-kosher meats already offered.

Kosher areas in dining halls would be maintained and unaffected. At the time, Handler was interested in de-emphasizing the Jewish identity of the school in order to attract a more diverse student body.

According to Edward Shapiro's book A Time for Healing: American Jewry since World War II, opposition erupted from donors and alumni, adversely affecting fundraising efforts. In fact, a pledge of one million dollars was reportedly withdrawn.

Both of these events suggest an unfortunate belief among some donors that Brandeis is a Jewish university that caters primarily to Jewish students and espouses only pro-Israel sentiments.

However, neither of those beliefs is true.

I do recognize that universities cannot be especially selective about their donations.

However, having a donor base that views Brandeis at the same level as prominent Jewish nonprofit organizations is unhealthy for the University. Brandeis is still a donor-reliant institution and, as an institution for academic discourse, we should not have to think about making a choice between encouraging intellectual debate and angering donors who aren't willing to accept a wide spectrum of political opinions.

Both Handler's introduction of pork and shellfish and Carter's speech on campus occurred before I enrolled at Brandeis. However, although I may not eat pork or agree with Carter's opinion on the Middle East, I consider it valuable that both events happened.

They help us recognize that the role of our school is one that should embrace diversity and respectfully consider opinions that differ from our own.

These are two qualities that are vital to any institution of higher learning and should never be compromised by money.