September 19, 2014

Advertise with Stand Firm

November 17, 2012


Jesuits Prefer Bestiality to Conservatism

Fordham University, a Catholic institution run by the Jesuits, recently had one of those marvelous juxtapositions that reveal so much about a school’s values. According to the Daily Caller, the College Republicans wanted to bring Ann Coulter to the campus to speak. The university president would have none of it:

On Nov. 10, Fordham University’s College Republicans canceled a scheduled speech by columnist Ann Coulter, after the Jesuit university’s president, Joseph M. McShane, publicly rebuked the organization for even considering inviting Coulter.

“To say that I am disappointed with the judgment and maturity of the College Republicans, however, would be a tremendous understatement,” McShane wrote in a statement the day before the event was canceled. “There are many people who can speak to the conservative point of view with integrity and conviction, but Ms. Coulter is not among them. Her rhetoric is often hateful and needlessly provocative — more heat than light — and her message is aimed squarely at the darker side of our nature.”

After the College Republicans took McShane’s advice, the university president softened his tone.

“Allow me to give credit where it is due: the leadership of the College Republicans acted quickly, took responsibility for their decisions, and expressed their regrets sincerely and eloquently,” McShane said.

Now, let me be clear: Coulter is not my cup of tea. She can be crude (referring to President Obama as a “retard,” for instance), and often prefers propaganda over persuasion. But then there’s the contrast:

Jesuit college Fordham University welcomed infanticide advocate Peter Singer for a panel discussion on Friday.

According to Fordham’s media relations website, Singer, a tenured Princeton bioethics professor, spoke from 4 to 6 p.m. in a panel the university promised “will provoke Christians to think about other animals in new ways.”

No doubt. Singer has argued that there is no moral distinction between human beings and animals, that sex with animals is morally acceptable, and that the lives of animals are to be preferred over unborn children. He has advocated for infanticide and euthanasia based on the “quality of life” standard used by the Nazis to justify mass killings of the disabled and mentally ill. He is the very antithesis of everything the Catholic Church–as well as virtually all other Christians–stand for, and yet his speaking at Fordham as perfectly acceptable, while Ann Coulter is “needlessly provocative.”

There’s an old saw about one of the popes encountering a member of the Society of Jesus, and asking, “I know you are a Jesuit, but are you a Catholic?” I can see where that comes from now.


Share this story:


Recent Related Posts

Comments

Facebook comments are closed.

8 comments

It would be interesting to see who else is on the panel. I can see having someone who is “out there” or a “ringer” on a panel just to give students an idea of the range of opinions on the subject - so that you have a genuine range of opinions. These are college kids, old enough to weigh and make distinctions regarding what the various speakers are saying. They may also not know that these types of opinions are out there, and if the Jesuits are doing their job they will have someone on the panel to expose this man and his opinions. 

I think the difference is that Ann Coulter was speaking alone, thus no one giving an opposing point of view. I would be considerably more bothered by this if he had been asked to speak alone - thus not having anyone on a panel to present the Church’s position/the moral position on the subject.

[1] Posted by advocate on 11-17-2012 at 04:29 PM · [top]

red herring

[2] Posted by paradoxymoron on 11-17-2012 at 05:53 PM · [top]

Shame on Fordham.

[3] Posted by Paula Loughlin on 11-17-2012 at 07:26 PM · [top]

There are a few colleges, but only a few, that have not succumbed to the pressure to be politically correct (and thus perfectly stupid).

[4] Posted by AnglicanXn on 11-18-2012 at 02:57 PM · [top]

Are you sure you have correctly identified Peter Singer? Several men share that name. Earlier this year there was a brief scandal at Georgetown (another Jesuit university) when it was thought that Peter Singer of Princeton was scheduled to speak, but it actually turned out to be Peter W. Singer of the Brookings Institution. The initial wave of alarm was soon followed by a wave of retractions.

[5] Posted by Roland on 11-21-2012 at 06:30 PM · [top]

Mr. Fischler,

Referring to the current President as “a retard” is far from crude. It is, in point of fact, one of the most charitably honest characterizations available in light of his official actions. Unless you believe that tyrant or statist are demonstrably accurate.

Pax et bonum,
Keith Töpfer

[6] Posted by Militaris Artifex on 11-22-2012 at 06:12 AM · [top]

Yes, Ms. Coulter is needlessly provocative, but it is political speech and she does not advocate violence.  Singer, assuming we have the correct person, is something else.  He advocates moral positions that have no place on a Catholic campus, moderated by a panel or not.  A further distinction that I read into this is that Coulter was invited by a small affinity group on campus.  Singer was invited by the University itself.  I don’t see how having a moderating panel makes either situation acceptable.

[7] Posted by Nikolaus on 11-22-2012 at 09:40 AM · [top]

As a Marquette University (Jesuit) Alumnus. I know the wolves can mix with the sheep. Take Daniel Magurie for example who is an ethics professor there. http://mu-warrior.blogspot.com/2012/02/dan-maguire-just-short-step-from.html

[8] Posted by Fr. Dale on 11-22-2012 at 03:35 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.