Otherwise you could be fired. My definition of academic freedom is that you should be free to pursue any line of inquiry and to publish and pronounce your results and their conclusions, without precondition. Of course there are limitations elsewhere (such as work which becomes classified, etc.), but I can't think of a case where the research in its infancy started out with the idea that it could cross some such line (nuclear research comes to mind). BYU by definition has a rigid line which cannot be crossed, and it is always implicit that this line could be crossed in certain lines of inquiry.

Again, I do not disparage BYU's lack of academic freedom per se. BYU could not be what it is if it allowed such conclusions. But it is a difference, and it is in striking contrast to many people's view of academic freedom.

The AAUP's statement in 1940 says, for instance:
"Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the institution."

Again, I also do not say BYU has no right to limit academic freedom. It certainly does. But it is very different than other universities. People at CB love to celebrate this fact, but rarely accept the negative consequences of BYU's peculiarity.