Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 82

Thread: Gonzaga to allow Shapiro Speech

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,203

    Default Gonzaga to allow Shapiro Speech

    Gonzaga University needs to immediately terminate the Vice President of Student Development for issuing the absolute worst public statement in the history of the University.

    In denying the request by the Gonzaga College Republicans invitation to have a Conservative Jewish speaker Ben Shapiro speak to them she issues the most anti-semitic statement I have ever seen out of any university. One of the reasons for denying the Jewish speaker is that “Gonzaga University is committed to the human dignity of every individual,” VP of Student Devlopment Judith Biggs Garbuio stated. “This is the core of our mission based on the teachings of Christ Jesus, and the foundations of the Society of Jesus. We stand in solidarity with vulnerable members of our community who may be targeted for discrimination, ridicule, or harassment by others.”

    It absolutely disgusting that the University feels its better to shut down the free flow of speech on campus than to allow students to listen to those with opposing view points. She didn't have any problem last year when she approved Angela Davis to speak on campus. The same Angela Davis who spouts anti-semitic rhetoric including taking positions that Jews should be exterminated and espouses the same anti-Jewish rhetoric that Aryan Nation members throw out but we have a conservative Jewish speaker isn't welcome because quite frankly her statement implies its because he is Jewish not Catholic.

    There have been a lot of Jewish students at Gonzaga and this public statement the University put out is glaring anti-semitic. There are a lot of donors who donate a lot of money to Gonzaga each year, like myself, who will now second guess whether we should send in a check to the University because of this woman's statement. I don't know if we hired this woman once the Hayden Lake Aryan Nations compound was shut down or what but halting discussion on a college campus does not lead to the pursuit of a quality education nor does disallowing Jewish speakers to speak on campus because their religion isn't based on the teachings of Christ Jeusus and the foundations of the Society of Jesus.

    Thayne needs to fix this and fix it fast. The first thing he should do is fire this nitwit and the second thing is personally call this Jewish speaker and invite him to share his ideas (whether you like them or hate them) so that people can expand their intellectual thinking processes instead of keeping alternative ideologies isolated. Students are smart enough to think for themselves and Gonzaga students in particular are smart otherwise they wouldn't have gotten into the University. The students don't need some anti-semitic woman cutting off speach because it comes from someone who happens to be Jewish.


    http://www.spokesman.com/stories/201...s-say-univers/

  2. #2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by basketballzag View Post
    Gonzaga University needs to immediately terminate the Vice President of Student Development for issuing the absolute worst public statement in the history of the University.

    In denying the request by the Gonzaga College Republicans invitation to have a Conservative Jewish speaker Ben Shapiro speak to them she issues the most anti-semitic statement I have ever seen out of any university. One of the reasons for denying the Jewish speaker is that “Gonzaga University is committed to the human dignity of every individual,” VP of Student Devlopment Judith Biggs Garbuio stated. “This is the core of our mission based on the teachings of Christ Jesus, and the foundations of the Society of Jesus. We stand in solidarity with vulnerable members of our community who may be targeted for discrimination, ridicule, or harassment by others.”

    It absolutely disgusting that the University feels its better to shut down the free flow of speech on campus than to allow students to listen to those with opposing view points. She didn't have any problem last year when she approved Angela Davis to speak on campus. The same Angela Davis who spouts anti-semitic rhetoric including taking positions that Jews should be exterminated and espouses the same anti-Jewish rhetoric that Aryan Nation members throw out but we have a conservative Jewish speaker isn't welcome because quite frankly her statement implies its because he is Jewish not Catholic.

    There have been a lot of Jewish students at Gonzaga and this public statement the University put out is glaring anti-semitic. There are a lot of donors who donate a lot of money to Gonzaga each year, like myself, who will now second guess whether we should send in a check to the University because of this woman's statement. I don't know if we hired this woman once the Hayden Lake Aryan Nations compound was shut down or what but halting discussion on a college campus does not lead to the pursuit of a quality education nor does disallowing Jewish speakers to speak on campus because their religion isn't based on the teachings of Christ Jeusus and the foundations of the Society of Jesus.

    Thayne needs to fix this and fix it fast. The first thing he should do is fire this nitwit and the second thing is personally call this Jewish speaker and invite him to share his ideas (whether you like them or hate them) so that people can expand their intellectual thinking processes instead of keeping alternative ideologies isolated. Students are smart enough to think for themselves and Gonzaga students in particular are smart otherwise they wouldn't have gotten into the University. The students don't need some anti-semitic woman cutting off speach because it comes from someone who happens to be Jewish.


    http://www.spokesman.com/stories/201...s-say-univers/
    Why is Shapiro's Jewishness important and so key to your argument as to why GU should allow him to speak on campus?

    He's a glib sophist who "argues" in bad faith and has argued explicitly for ethnic cleaning of Arabs.

    As for Angela Davis - I can't speak for her corpus, but at a high level it seems that theres a conflation of her criticism of the state actions of Israel with hatred of Jewish people. That's a stunning logical leap, but a common one for certain types of ideologues.

    It's less that he's Jewish, and more that he's an intellectual featherweight, espouses ethnic cleansing programs, and uses rhetorical figures that dehumanizes Arabs, women, and African-Americans.
    History has its eyes on you.

    Sage of the GU Message Board

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,942

    Default

    Of course he should be allowed to speak....he is one of the most intelligent and articulate leaders of the Republican Party....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Irving, TX
    Posts
    8,303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Once and Future Zag View Post
    Why is Shapiro's Jewishness important and so key to your argument as to why GU should allow him to speak on campus?

    He's a glib sophist who "argues" in bad faith and has argued explicitly for ethnic cleaning of Arabs.

    As for Angela Davis - I can't speak for her corpus, but at a high level it seems that theres a conflation of her criticism of the state actions of Israel with hatred of Jewish people. That's a stunning logical leap, but a common one for certain types of ideologues.

    It's less that he's Jewish, and more that he's an intellectual featherweight, espouses ethnic cleansing programs, and uses rhetorical figures that dehumanizes Arabs, women, and African-Americans.
    I agree with you OAFZ, but for a different reason. Shapiro is a conservative pundit, so naturally he's an "intellectual featherweight" as you describe him. Whatever...it's a bad move on the part of GU.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TexasZagFan View Post
    I agree with you OAFZ, but for a different reason. Shapiro is a conservative pundit, so naturally he's an "intellectual featherweight" as you describe him. Whatever...it's a bad move on the part of GU.
    Might I have originally suggested to the young Republicans at GU that there would have been far less inflammatory guests with more intellectual merit than Shapiro. Thomas Sowell, for instance.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,942

    Default

    They want to hear Ben......let them....

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Irving, TX
    Posts
    8,303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alum08 View Post
    Might I have originally suggested to the young Republicans at GU that there would have been far less inflammatory guests with more intellectual merit than Shapiro. Thomas Sowell, for instance.
    Great idea...I also recommend Dr. Walter Williams.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    460

    Default

    I would be fine if the stated reasoning was limited to student safety. But the university statement seemed to imply that they were more worried about the problematic speech of the counter protestors. In other words, they gave the heckler's veto power.

    So instead of airing both sides out in the open, they are choosing to push the growing divide further into the dark, which inevitably leads to division and radicalization as both sides retreat to the safe harbor of their respective factions.

    This is a mistake.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Irving, TX
    Posts
    8,303

    Default

    This would not have happened under Robert Spitzer's presidency.

    Where is the current President?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Down the street and around the corner
    Posts
    44,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TexasZagFan View Post
    This would not have happened under Robert Spitzer's presidency.
    In 2000 and 2001, Spitzer barred a Planned Parenthood speaker and an on-campus performance of “The Vagina Monologues,” an all-woman play made up of monologues about sex, masturbation and lesbianism.

    Critics said the decisions undercut academic freedom. Spitzer said a Catholic university could not appear to endorse ideas that challenge church opposition to abortion, birth control and homosexuality.

    After those controversies, the university adopted a policy governing outside speakers. Barred are those who are disruptive, promote a message contrary to the school’s Catholic teachings or might create a hostile learning environment.

    SOURCE: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle...i-gay-speaker/
    Would Spitzer have an issue with a faculty member whose lifestyle challenged church opposition to homosexuality ?

    https://www.gonzagabulletin.com/arts...d281e025f.html

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    7,059

    Default

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=v-hIVnmUdXM

    starts out a little slow but builds to nice finish

    2 professors that should be on the college circuit imo

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    11,603

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RenoZag View Post
    Would Spitzer have an issue with a faculty member whose lifestyle challenged church opposition to homosexuality ?

    https://www.gonzagabulletin.com/arts...d281e025f.html
    Point of order.

    Strictly speaking, the church is not opposed to homosexuality.

    http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_cs...m/p3s2c2a6.htm


    2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Napa, CA
    Posts
    4,272

    Default

    Feel like we're back in the OCC...
    I will thank God for the day and the moment I have. - Jimmy V

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Down the street and around the corner
    Posts
    44,813

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by former1dog View Post
    Point of order.

    Strictly speaking, the church is not opposed to homosexuality.

    http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_cs...m/p3s2c2a6.htm
    That's not my point. Tex claims Spitzer wouldn't have let this happen, as though Spitzer was somehow open to hosting all points of view. Spitzer's history, OTOH, indicated otherwise. He was a "company man" as the citation I offered demonstrates.

    Side note:

    I have an acquaintance on FB who states she has a deep love and devotion to "the Catholic faith." She writes: "I oppose hiring professors at Catholic schools who live openly gay lives in contradiction to the Church's moral teaching and in opposition to a Catholic school's mission." She asserts homosexuality "is a moral evil" that violates " fundamental Catholic teaching on the sanctity of complementary marriage." She's waging a lobbying campaign to support Shapiro's appearance via social media, letters to The Bulletin, and other measures. She is in her early 60's, as am I. We have nothing in common when it comes to spiritual matters. Our only common ground is we attended GU.

    There are Zags of all political stripes: Conservative. Liberal. Agnostic. Deist. Catholic. Jewish. Protestant. . .the list goes on and on.

    Happily, Gonzaga basketball, to a degree, unites these diversities a few hours at a time, 30 - 35 times a year.
    Last edited by RenoZag; 12-11-2018 at 08:02 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Irving, TX
    Posts
    8,303

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RenoZag View Post
    Would Spitzer have an issue with a faculty member whose lifestyle challenged church opposition to homosexuality ?

    https://www.gonzagabulletin.com/arts...d281e025f.html
    You got me on that one, RZ, though I don't necessarily equate a play with a public speaker. Times have changed over the past 15-17 years. I'll leave it at that.


    Like LIZF, I wouldn't be in favor of bringing back the OCC. It had a good run, but its day is over.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,942

    Default

    There is no fact based political civil discourse possible in America today.....there is a multi billion dollar industry that benefits from outrage and anger... the true believers just parrot the talking points they hear or read in their media...as facts...or alternative facts...that is where the OCC ended up....glad it is gone...

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alum08 View Post
    I would be fine if the stated reasoning was limited to student safety. But the university statement seemed to imply that they were more worried about the problematic speech of the counter protestors. In other words, they gave the heckler's veto power.

    So instead of airing both sides out in the open, they are choosing to push the growing divide further into the dark, which inevitably leads to division and radicalization as both sides retreat to the safe harbor of their respective factions.

    This is a mistake.
    It's not a mistake - he's a glib, unprincipled provocateur. There's no academic value in having him speak, while he mooches off the money and the good name of GU and it's students.

    I'd think being an advocate for ethnic cleansing alone rules out a welcome mat being laid out for him by the Jesuits.

    It does in my house - maybe others are different.

    I mean - you can counterbalance him with someone sober and intelligent, who is more interested in discussion on rational terms - a Samuel Goldman, a Tom Nichols, a Kelly Vlahos, a Stephen F. Hayes, etc but aside from that I'm not sure what you mean by 'both sides"

    We don't take flat earthers as seriously as we do NASA when it comes to the sciences... right?

    I think GU is in the right here, not because he's Jewish, not because he's "conservative" - but because he's an ephemeral culture war grifter. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
    History has its eyes on you.

    Sage of the GU Message Board

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Once and Future Zag View Post
    It's not a mistake - he's a glib, unprincipled provocateur. There's no academic value in having him speak, while he mooches off the money and the good name of GU and it's students.

    I'd think being an advocate for ethnic cleansing alone rules out a welcome mat being laid out for him by the Jesuits.

    It does in my house - maybe others are different.

    I mean - you can counterbalance him with someone sober and intelligent, who is more interested in discussion on rational terms - a Samuel Goldman, a Tom Nichols, a Kelly Vlahos, a Stephen F. Hayes, etc but aside from that I'm not sure what you mean by 'both sides"

    We don't take flat earthers as seriously as we do NASA when it comes to the sciences... right?

    I think GU is in the right here, not because he's Jewish, not because he's "conservative" - but because he's an ephemeral culture war grifter. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
    GU is probably right about refusing Shapiro on the basis of student safety and that he is an agent provocateur. But the line of reasoning they went with in their statement about the risk of counter protestors was way, way off the mark. It reeks of modern "safe-space" liberalism. It will do more harm than good for the university and further alienates a shrinking minority on college campuses.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Irving, TX
    Posts
    8,303

    Default

    Just my opinion, but there is far greater diversity of thought on these forums than is on display at GU today.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Spokannnnnnnnnnne
    Posts
    2,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Once and Future Zag View Post
    It's not a mistake - he's a glib, unprincipled provocateur. There's no academic value in having him speak, while he mooches off the money and the good name of GU and it's students.

    I'd think being an advocate for ethnic cleansing alone rules out a welcome mat being laid out for him by the Jesuits.

    It does in my house - maybe others are different.

    I mean - you can counterbalance him with someone sober and intelligent, who is more interested in discussion on rational terms - a Samuel Goldman, a Tom Nichols, a Kelly Vlahos, a Stephen F. Hayes, etc but aside from that I'm not sure what you mean by 'both sides"

    We don't take flat earthers as seriously as we do NASA when it comes to the sciences... right?

    I think GU is in the right here, not because he's Jewish, not because he's "conservative" - but because he's an ephemeral culture war grifter. Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
    Tried to find where Shapiro advocated ethnic cleansing. Can you point me to that?

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Spokannnnnnnnnnne
    Posts
    2,917

    Default

    Culture war Grifter..... Hilarious... You are describing the humanities at GU.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,942

    Default

    Of course Ben should speak...as should Farrakhan....David Duke.....Khalid Mashal…..Lapierre....this is a University for crying out loud...the students should be able to hear uncomfortable ideas.....if there are protests ..fine....protesting is as American as the National Anthem …… even Bill Walton should be allowed to speak.....well...maybe not.....

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,933

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ekrub View Post
    Tried to find where Shapiro advocated ethnic cleansing. Can you point me to that?
    https://townhall.com/columnists/bens...y-word-n976781

    Here you go.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,933

    Default

    Does Shapiro not have any other platform in which he can share his thoughts and ideas?

    Does a University have an obligation to give a platform to someone who at times will share thoughts and opinions that can at times be thought to be "hate speech"?

    I would be shocked if an intellectual Conservative voice who doesn't pander to the lowest common denominator would find the same issues when wanting to speak.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,538

    Default

    He has Consistently stated that he has changed his opinion since writing that

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •