Gonzaga University blocks Ben Shapiro speech, citing ‘Jesuit’ values

[JonNC]

dvdjs:

I think that the argument is pithy and as such is not extensive enough. But if you reduced Murray to a few words what would you say his point is?

The concern here is not for me to define Murray’s works, but to show the author’s description and point out how absurd it is.

The author goes into considerable detail about the shortcomings of the logic, the rhetoric, and the absence of reflection in Shapriro’s work.

Even if this was true it would be totally irrelevant to the topic of whether Shapiro should have been allowed to speak. I consider virtually everything that comes from MSM to exhibit shortcomings in logic, rhetoric, and an with absence of reflection, but it would never occur to me to try to have their comments banned even if such a thing was possible.

Well said.
This is the difference in attitudes about speech.
For the conservative ( and classic liberals), one is not denied the opportunity to speak simply because it doesn’t comport with an opponent’s standard of “logic, rhetoric, and reflection”.

 

[marybobo]

I always want to ask any politician who uses “values” in regard to themselves or their parties, “and just what values are those?”

 

[Cathoholic]

I would like to see data behind conclusions about frequency and proportion.

Well keep on the lookout for people like me then as I would like to see it too.

For all others . . .

. . . Keep these things in mind that I brought up above, and go to a few university talks and draw your own conclusions. You will see soon enough.

Of if you are a student, try wearing a “Che” t-shirt to your classes.

Then attempt to wear a MAGA cap to class and see if it is all the same.

 

[Cathoholic]

The “argument” on behalf of liberalism is already morphing from not belonging “anywhere” to excuse-making for liberal “tenured professors”.

Don’t buy it.

(I know YOU won’t buy into that JonNC. But there are other readers here that might, if these other aspects were left unstated.)

Many of you readers have seen this double-standard played out in the universities. Now after bringing it out again, you will be even MORE cognizant of this problem the next time you witness it first-hand. Which won’t be long if you are a frequent-flyer at universities.

 

[Ender]

. . . Keep these things in mind that I brought up above, and go to a few university talks and draw your own conclusions. You will see soon enough.

A lot of talks are taped by the universities and put out on YouTube. I watched the Murray talk given at Notre Dame last year not long after his talk scheduled at Middlebury was violently shut down. If anyone can find something so objectionable in it that he should have been banned from giving it, I’d like to hear about it. I’m pretty sure this was the same speech he would have given at Middlebury. This is the kind of speech the left considers so dangerous that no one should be allowed to hear it.

Of if you are a student, try wearing a “Che” t-shirt to your classes.

Then attempt to wear a MAGA cap to class and see if it is all the same.

Good comparison. This surely makes the point.

 

[JonNC]

The “argument” on behalf of liberalism is already morphing from not belonging “anywhere” to excuse-making for liberal “tenured professors”.

Don’t buy it.

(I know YOU won’t buy into that JonNC. But there are other readers here that might, if these other aspects were left unstated.)

Many of you readers have seen this double-standard played out in the universities. Now after bringing it out again, you will be even MORE cognizant of this problem the next time you witness it first-hand. Which won’t be long if you are a frequent-flyer at universities.

My first question is should this standard of speech be applied to comments about President Trump?
My second question is should people like Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, DNC chair Tom Perez be held to the same standard? Does it apply to Hillary Clinton after the deplorables comment?

 

[Cathoholic]

Ben Shapiro is a very intelligent man.

He graduated cum laude from Harvard Law school.

Attempts to paint Shapiro as less-than-intelligent here are mere veiled ad-hominems and are not persuasive. Just like the phony attempts to paint Mr. Shapiro as an inciter of violence are.

Ben Shapiro is being bullied because he has conservative political viewpoints.

And liberal college administrators want to stifle the free-exchange of those conservative ideas.
And their actions speak to this truth.

 

[dvdjs]

Even if this was true it would be totally irrelevant to the topic of whether Shapiro should have been allowed to speak.

I disagree. The university is responsible for curating material.

I consider virtually everything that comes from MSM to exhibit shortcomings in logic, rhetoric, and an with absence of reflection, but it would never occur to me to try to have their comments banned

The content of material on a campus is the responsibility of the university. The content on the MSM is the responsibility of the those who are in the position of selecting and editing content. But that responsibility is not yours.

 

[dvdjs]

So, it isn’t okay for a guest speaker, but a tenured professor has Carte Blanche? If they don’t want that in their campuses, start with their employees.

There are remedies available in the case of tenured faculty that fall short of dismissal. Tht is the place to start.

 

[dvdjs]

For the conservative ( and classic liberals), one is not denied the opportunity to speak simply because it doesn’t comport with an opponent’s standard of “logic, rhetoric, and reflection”.

I think that a community need not entertain speech that is not up standards of “logic, rhetoric, and reflection”.
It is, for example, scarcely imaginable that a university would support a visitor, or faculty, promoting a flat-earth or young-earth theory. But that is entirely different government censorship. And that is the what classic liberals and conservatives were largely concerned about.

 

[dvdjs]

go to a few university talks

I go to many.

 

[dvdjs]

Attempts to paint Shapiro as less-than-intelligent

There has been no attempt to paint him as less than intelligent.

Ben Shapiro is being bullied because he has conservative political viewpoints.

I think that his shortcoming is not conservatism, but his rhetoric, which falls short on scholarship and alignment with human dignity and solidarity with vulnerable people.

And liberal college administrators want to stifle the free-exchange of those conservative ideas.

There are many conservative speakers on campuses who do not elicit the reaction given to Shapiro, Milo, and other rhetorical flame throwers. This is not about conservatism.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

So, it isn’t okay for a guest speaker, but a tenured professor has Carte Blanche? If they don’t want that in their campuses, start with their employees.

There are remedies available in the case of tenured faculty that fall short of dismissal. Tht is the place to start.

That seems inconsistent with:

That is not the way that universities want people talking about one another.

 

[Cathoholic]

dvdjs . . .

There has been no attempt to paint him as less than intelligent.

Yes there has.

But as for others, I will let the readers make their own determinations.

 

[Cathoholic]

Cathoholic . . .

Ben Shapiro is being bullied because he has conservative political viewpoints.

dvdjs . . .

I think that his shortcoming is not conservatism, but his rhetoric, which falls short on scholarship and alignment with human dignity and solidarity with vulnerable people.

I disagree.

His “shortcoming” is he is conservative and effective.

And that is why speakers with other much more profound issues against human dignity . . . . are welcomed in the university speaking “ecosphere”.

Conservativism.

 

[JonNC]

There has been no attempt to paint him as less than intelligent.

I think that his shortcoming is not conservatism, but his rhetoric, which falls short on scholarship and alignment with human dignity and solidarity with vulnerable people.

There are many conservative speakers on campuses who do not elicit the reaction given to Shapiro, Milo, and other rhetorical flame throwers. This is not about conservatism.

The first sentence is then contradicted by the following, particularly putting him in a category with Milo. The comment is either from ignorance of the two or rhetorical, like putting Obama in a category with Farrakhan.
It blows up any concern for scholarship.

 

[Cathoholic]

dvdjs . . .

There are many conservative speakers on campuses who do not elicit the reaction given to Shapiro,

So what?

This “reaction” is manufactured.

Shapiro is a persuasive effective conservative speaker. Very influential conservative.

 

[ProVobis]

Don’t feel too bad. The chances of getting a Latin Mass priest to speak at a Jesuit school aren’t too good either.

 

[dvdjs]

That is not the way that universities want people talking about one another.

This is simple. Consider bad behavior in your family. There are remedies short of disowning the offender. But in the case of a visitor inclined to the same behavior? There is no need to invite them

 

[dvdjs]

Yes there has.

You might point them out. I personally consider him very intelligent. He knows exactly what he selling and chooses exactly how he goes about selling it.