By JOHN P. CASTONGUAY

COLUMNIST

So, how about Ann Coulter? This past week, Fordham was abuzz with the news that Ann Coulter had been invited to speak on campus by the College Republicans. Due to her controversial, abrasive style and hateful remarks, a protest movement quickly started in an attempt to convince the administration to prevent Coulter from coming. Within 24 hours of the announcement of Coulter’s appearance, Rev. Joseph M. McShane, S.J., president of the University, issued a statement declaring that he would not prevent the event from taking place. The message stated that Coulter’s appearance should be used as an opportunity to demonstrate the superiority of Fordham’s Jesuit Catholic ideals. McShane did write, however, “To say that I am disappointed with the judgment and maturity of the College Republicans, however, would be a tremendous understatement.”

The College Republicans issued a statement in response, announcing that prior to McShane’s statement, they had decided to rescind the invitation to Coulter. McShane issued a follow-up statement praising the College Republicans for acting quickly, accepting responsibility and expressing regret. He wrote, “[T]he University community, and our extended Fordham family passed the test with flying colors, engaging in impassioned but overwhelmingly-civil debate on politics, academic freedom and freedom of speech.”

Unfortunately, though predictably given the current state of national politics, the debate was far from civil. The treatment of Ann Coulter and, in a disturbing turn, of the College Republicans, was appalling. Ann Coulter was called a bully, a homophobic bigot, “a vile creature” and worse on the social media pages of Fordham students. Civil discourse would have revealed that many of these labels cannot be factually supported. For example,  Coulter is on the Advisory Council for GoProud, a group that represents gay conservatives.

In criticizing her sometimes-hateful rhetoric, these students ironically spouted hate of their own.  They failed to apply the Jesuit principles that they used to argue against Ann Coulter’s appearance in their treatment of Coulter and the College Republicans. In an exchange typical of the debate over Coulter’s appearance, a liberal student declared that Coulter should have her voicebox removed. The ensuing exchange involved the words “twat,” “little girl” and “disgusting” in reference to the person with the opposing viewpoint.

This is just one example of the mud-slinging to which Fordham students resorted. We should be ashamed that we, as Fordham students, were unable to rise above the level of incivility many ascribe to Coulter and resorted to verbally abusing people of different understandings. Next time you get into a disagreement with someone, think about whether or not the language you use reflects your recognition of their worth and common humanity. Be intolerant of hate in all circumstances, not just from those with whom you disagree. Then we will truly be worthy of  McShane’s congratulations.