“Islamo-Fascism” and incendiary speech | Civil Religion | STLtoday
“Islamo-Fascism” and incendiary speech
David Horowitz, from the blog http://lesterhhunt.blogspot.com/2008/05/david-horowitz-not-consistent-friend-of.html
In this STLToday article we learn that St. Louis University disinvited David Horowitz from speaking at a campus event entitled “Islamo-Fascism Awareness and Civil Rights” because “the school was concerned that the event could be viewed as ‘attacking another faith and seeking to cause derision on campus.’” Here we seem to have the classic conundrum of a university in a free society, how to balance the rights to free speech and the free exchange of ideas with the need to stand against the spread of hatred, bigotry, and one-sided distortions of truth. Did SLU balance these needs or was the university’s decision “outrageous” as Horowitz charges?
I don’t know, and I don’t think the article in STLToday gives us enough information to decide, and I think we should hear more about this. Extremist rhetoric shuts down the exchange of ideas, preferring to convince its listener by stirring primal fear and anger rather than convincing the listener through logic, and we have far too much extremist rhetoric clouding our political scene, preventing the truth from getting out. This is the heart of the issue with what was wrong with Rep. Joe Wilson shouting “YOU LIE!” at President Obama during his address on health care reform. It did not serve to invite conversation, it attempted to cut off communication.
Serious issues deserve serious conversation, and that can only happen when the conversation remains civil, like we strive for here at “Civil Religion.” I doubt that SLU’s actions rose to level of “outrageous”, but perhaps they were regrettable. Who can say? The article notes that “SLU” (who exactly?) had asked for the student group who was sponsoring the event to make some changes that would have made it more balanced, and only cancelled it when these suggestions were rejected. What were the changes? It seems reasonable for SLU to have asked the organizers “to, for example, include scholars on Islam with different perspectives.” Would that have been a bad thing?
I call on the Post-Dispatch to tell us more, to give this important local story the coverage it deserves in fair and balanced coverage that gives its readers enough information to make an informed decision. Right now, it just seems crazy all the way around, with the STLToday article provoking ire from all sides (as is obvious from the comments) since it highlights only the controversy and not the real facts behind the story–the article itself adding to the incendiary rhetoric of our times. I suspect the truth is far more rational and instructive. Let’s try and find it out.
“Islamo-Fascism” and incendiary speech | Civil Religion | STLtoday