By The Editorial Board
Inviting Ann Coulter to do a speaking engagement at Fordham was a move in very poor taste by the College Republicans, for all of the reasons cited in the uproar surrounding her visit.
Especially in the wake of several incidents involving hate speech and discrimination on campus last semester, the decision to invite Coulter to espouse her divisive rhetoric in front of an academic audience was regrettable at best.
The student body need not agree with a speaker coming to campus; controversial speakers can challenge students’ ideas and expand their intellectual horizons. Bringing these types of speakers to help spark discourse enriches our intellectual environment.
The virtual storm of discontent voiced by Fordham students in the 24 hours following the initial announcement that Coulter would speak did not reflect mere disagreement with Coulter’s ideas or principles, but displayed sheer outrage.
Coulter has made a name for herself through inflammatory, attention-seeking statements that do nothing to further intellectual dialogue. The student outcry at the prospect of welcoming her to our University was merited due to the countless insensitive, hateful comments that Coulter has made and will likely continue to make.
We at The Ram are proud that the student body did not passively accept the prospect of her visit, but we also do not support some of the equally-hateful speech used on Facebook and in the Twittersphere to protest Coulter and the incendiary, extreme version of conservatism for which she stands.
Some of the language used in this online debate on social media sites was highly inappropriate, distasteful and unbecoming of Fordham students. Despite this, we are glad that the response was large and vocal.
As Rev. Joseph M. McShane, S.J., president of the University, implied in his statement, two wrongs do not make a right. Using hateful language to parry someone who has offended numerous groups with hate speech no more lives up to Fordham’s mission than does inviting Coulter to speak. Regarding McShane’s response to the incident, The Ram’s editorial board agrees with his position that disallowing the Coulter event was not the answer, that “the answer to bad speech is more speech.”
Although we shared in McShane’s profound disappointment with the College Republicans’ decision to use their influence and their share of the student activities fee on such a speaker, we do not support McShane’s method of publicly shaming the student group without first contacting them privately.
A later statement from McShane praised the College Republicans’ decision (apparently made before his first statement) to rescind the invitation, but the hasty inclination toward public chastisement does not demonstrate appropriate respect for student leaders and groups.
All in all, we are proud of our entire University community, including the College Republicans, for declining to entertain Coulter’s particular brand of “politics” and feel that we can all breathe a deep sigh of relief that we can spend Thursday night, Nov. 29 engaging in a much more pleasant opportunity to join together for a good, common cause: Fordham’s first home men’s basketball game.
