Two weeks ago, Dr. Mark Christian and Anna Paulina spoke at an event at Creighton University. As our organization understands, there has been some backlash and protests against these speakers and what they believe. This is unfortunate, as both speakers brought a wealth of knowledge about immigration and the current situation at the southern border to the event. I would personally recommend that you watch both of these speakers online, for even if you disagree with them, you may yet learn something new and understand a perspective that is not often spoken about on college campuses.
In regards to either of these speakers apparently espousing “hate speech”, I would again point you towards actually listening to what they have to say. Unfortunately, since many modern protests spark from a lack of knowledge of what the speaker(s) believe, organizations such as the Southern Poverty Law Center take advantage of this and label almost anything conservative as “hate speech.” This is important to understand, as the SPLC has been egregiously poor in its determinations of what should be defined as a hate group. If you want proof I would recommend the Washington Post article: “The Southern Poverty Law Center Has Lost All Credibility.”
Even if the group that has specifically labeled Dr. Christian guilty of “hate speech” being completely unreliable is not enough for you, it is important to know what happened at the event. After the Democrat speakers cancelled just the weekend before, it was set to be a one-sided panel due to the cancellation being too close to the event to replace the left-leaning speakers. At the panel discussion, everything was relatively calm until a student accused Dr. Christian of being Islamophobic and “hateful” towards Muslims during the question and answer segment (ironic itself considering almost all of Dr. Christian’s relatives are themselves Muslims). After several minutes of back-and-forth dialogue that included the student’s attempt to refute all of Dr. Christian’s claims on verses in the Quran, which Dr. Christian memorized growing up in an intensely religious household, the event had to be finished due to time constraints. The student immediately left even after Dr. Christian chose to remain after the panel’s conclusion for pictures and any other questions.
In other words, there was no threat to anyone’s safety and the student willingly chose to leave the debate. Frankly unless “hate speech” includes a perfectly safe environment where all ideas are welcome in the public realm of debate, where no one is seeking harm towards anyone, then virtually every debate in history involves “hate speech”. If someone has a different idea than you on political matters, it is best to engage in discourse to better understand why someone thinks that way. It is never better for you or anyone else to seek to shut down the conversation simply because it contradicts what you believe. In the future I hope that you seek civil discussion before protest, because that is how a constitutional republic such as ours survives.