Coulter talk tests controversial issues statement

One of the most sensitive challenges I face regularly is to respond to criticisms that result when a “controversial” speaker comes to our campus. A “liberal” speaker draws angry letters and calls from “conservatives” who criticize our judgment. A “conservative” presenter elicits similar protests from “liberals.” The more “controversial” the individual or the topic, the more heated the reaction.

I use quotation marks around the words above because descriptors such as liberal, conservative and controversial exist, to a certain degree, in the eyes of the beholders and are defined by individuals’ thresholds of tolerance for opposing points of view.
 
I always have taken great pride in, and cherished, the St. Thomas community’s culture of support and encouragement for honest, respectful dialogue on issues that divide us. At times those issues can be controversial, and accordingly we have developed a series of guidelines to deal with them.

Those guidelines were tested Monday when Ann Coulter, a conservative author and commentator, spoke to a capacity crowd in O’Shaughnessy Educational Center auditorium. I did not attend her speech, but I am told by many people that Ms. Coulter was unsparing in her vitriolic criticism of “liberals” and treated in a sarcastic, disrespectful and mean-spirited manner any audience members who challenged her viewpoints.

Ms. Coulter’s appearance, while sponsored by the College Republicans and the St. Thomas Standard student newspaper, was not funded by the university or any student organizations. Her fee was paid by Young America’s Foundation, a Virginia-based organization whose Web site says it is “committed to ensuring that increasing numbers of young Americans understand and are inspired by the ideas of individual freedom, a strong national defense, free enterprise and traditional values.”

One caller who found both Ms. Coulter’s remarks and attitude to be appalling had an interesting question. He understands the value of hearing “controversial” speakers and debating issues, “but where do you draw the line?” he asked. “When do you say, ‘We’re not going to invite this person to campus,’ especially if she isn’t going to respect others’ points of view?”

His question is thought-provoking, indeed, especially in light of our controversial issues statement. Our Board of Trustees approved the statement in 1994, and it has served us well in the subsequent years as a valuable guide.

The statement says that St. Thomas values “the diversity of viewpoints reflective of a larger society” and “also recognizes and accepts its responsibility to respond to the dynamic tension that exists between the challenges of contemporary living and educating within the living Catholic tradition.”

“The university exists as an environment which not only allows, but encourages, members of its community to ask questions and openly explore challenging ideas in their personal search for truth,” the statement continues. “Open forums through which controversial issues may be addressed in a responsible and educative manner will be available. More important, the university will ensure that these dialogues occur in an arena free of reproach or reprisal. While the university cherishes free expression, it recognizes the difference between freedom of ideas and freedom of behavior. In discussion and debate, members and guests of the university community are expected to treat one another with respect and dignity.”

The question, then, is if Ms. Coulter crossed the line identified by the caller. In particular, did she treat members of the university community “with respect and dignity,” as our controversial issues statement suggests?

Perspectives differ, and as I stated earlier, to a certain extent we must leave the answer “to the eye of the beholder.” But the reports I have heard from people whose views I respect suggest that her performance went far beyond the bounds of what is commonly accepted as civil discourse. Although her presentation may have been meant as an “act” or “shtick” to entertain by provoking those who disagree, such behavior unfortunately contributes to the growing dark side of our culture — a disrespect for persons and their sincerely held beliefs. Such hateful speech vulgarizes our culture and goes against everything the University of St. Thomas stands for.

What I have learned from this most recent experience is that in the future we as a community will need to work harder to nurture here a spirit of civil discourse. We need to continue to carefully examine requests to bring speakers and performers to campus in order to assure that their presentations will comply with our controversial issues statement. Lastly, we need to ensure that all speakers agree to treat others with respect and not to, as our caller said, “step over the line.”