Society and Culture

Charles Murray: An open letter to the students of Azusa Pacific University

Image Credit: YouTube

Image Credit: YouTube

I was scheduled to speak to you tomorrow. I was going to talk about my new book, “The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Getting Ahead,” and was looking forward to it. But it has been “postponed.” Why? An email from your president, Jon Wallace, to my employer, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), said “Given the lateness of the semester and the full record of Dr. Murray’s scholarship, I realized we needed more time to prepare for a visit and postponed Wednesday’s conversation.” This, about an appearance that has been planned for months. I also understand from another faculty member that he and the provost were afraid of “hurting our faculty and students of color.”

You’re at college, right? Being at college is supposed to mean thinking for yourselves, right? Okay, then do it. Don’t be satisfied with links to websites that specialize in libeling people. Lose the secondary sources. Explore for yourself the “full range” of my scholarship and find out what it is that I’ve written or said that would hurt your faculty or students of color. It’s not hard. In fact, you can do it without moving from your chair if you’re in front of your computer.

You don’t have to buy my books. Instead, go to my web page at AEI. There you will find the full texts of dozens of articles I’ve written for the last quarter-century. Browse through them. Will you find anything that is controversial? That people disagree with? Yes, because (hang on to your hats) scholarship usually means writing about things on which people disagree.

The task of the scholar is to present a case for his or her position based on evidence and logic. Another task of the scholar is to do so in a way that invites everybody into the discussion rather than demonize those who disagree. Try to find anything under my name that is not written in that spirit. Try to find even a paragraph that is written in anger, takes a cheap shot, or attacks women, African Americans, Latinos, Asians, or anyone else.

But there’s another way to decide whether you would have been safe in my hands if I had spoken at Azusa Pacific. Go to YouTube and search “Charles Murray.” You will get links to dozens of lectures, panel discussions, and television interviews. You can watch Q&A sessions in which I field questions from students like you, including extremely hostile ones. Watch even for a few minutes. Ask yourself if I insult them or lash out. If I do anything except take their questions seriously and answer them accordingly. Ask yourself if I’m anything more dangerous than an earnest and nerdy old guy.

Azusa Pacific’s administration wants to protect you from earnest and nerdy old guys who have opinions that some of your faculty do not share. Ask if this is why you’re getting a college education.

Sincerely,

Charles Murray

Follow AEIdeas on Twitter at @AEIdeas.

132 thoughts on “Charles Murray: An open letter to the students of Azusa Pacific University

  1. I am a current student at Azusa Pacific and must say a majority of these comments are invalid when commenting on our school’s theology and ideology.
    Let me tell you from a Roman Catholic student attending a highly protestant school, we hold ourselves to have high morals and make it a hope to act like great followers of Christ. Given that WE ARE NOT PERFECT and to put that pressure on any student or any institution is ridiculous.
    By all means criticize on facts that you know and not on what you believe. If you have not stepped a foot on Azusa Pacific’s campus, then therefor keep your ignorant opinion to yourself.
    As to the cancellation of your invitation Dr. Murray know that not all students agree with this. I believe there was no reason to this cancellation and in fact I would’ve enjoyed if you did push our buttons or anger us in some way. The fact of the matter is that I go to a very sheltered school. We are not a normal university, we are a Christian university therefor we like to uphold ourselves with Christian morals and if someone accused you of being a public “racist” then understand that of course you would be uninvited to my university.
    Again, not all students agree with this ideology. I sure don’t. But THAT is the university that I attend and therefore THAT is the way it is going to be.

    (Sometimes you just have to abide by the institution that offers you those most scholarship).
    But as a side note, as much as I don’t agree with the institution on MANY issues… Azusa Pacific is a fantastic school with amazing open minded students and faculty, so don’t label us all as these stereotypical “liberal” or “conservative” Christians. Many of us here are not even close to that.

    Thank you.

    • Dear APU Student @ Pardon me, but your comment to Mr. Murray’s letter is overreacting and missing the point entirely. The postponing diplomatically implied there was something with Mr. Murray’s past, trying to make a judgement that students should have given the possibility to make.

      You claim this is how a Christian University should work. But Christianity is not about the teacher avoiding students to confront a (probably) different view.
      What struck me the most is hearing you say : if you are accused of being racist you are uninvited to my University.

      Here’s 2 errors : a) being accused is not being already convicted (except in Communist Romania, e.g., where i grew. What’s left of the US if you do not have due process?). This is crediting a virtual-mob-lynch. b) you are uninvited to my university = you speak as if this was your private property and as if you alone incarnate the rest of the students.

      Christianity is Freedom. The Truth will set you free. And truth doesn’t come through administrative censorship but through reason and experience.

    • You have no right to be indignant. They had already scheduled the lecture. If they had turned him down in the first place it would have been different. They cancelled it out of cowardice the day before he was about to speak.

      It’s depressing that Christians would jump on the secular egalitarian bandwagon and label someone a racist who simply talks about scientific facts. The reason he is attacked by the establishment is that he undermines the utopian fantasies of the secular humanists. You are allying yourself with people who hold your in just as much disdain as him.

    • APU Student, you write at an early elementary school level. I am embarrassed for you. It’s no wonder that you chose to use a pseudonym.

  2. The biggest problem facing America is it’s not American.

    The moment America became anti-White then it ceased to exist. Conservatives are terrified of being called “racist” which is why they always lose. Either Conservatives, which are overwhelmingly White, accept that the world hates, steals, rapes, murders, and displaces Whites or they disappear.

    Politics is presence. When America isn’t White it isn’t America. If America was explicitly 100% White there would be no discussion about Turd World immigration, illegals, or foreign aid. Whites have no need of non-Whites and never have.

    When I point this out White Conservatives sound no different from Libtards. Mass non-White immigration and so-called “refugees” from the Turd World. Whites go out of their way to “prove” they’re not “racist” by giving them Welfare, Rent, and Tuition. Then the non-Whites rape, rob, murder, and vote Democrat.

    There is no such thing as Left and Right. There’s only White and anti-White. Either Whites ask themselves – What’s good for Whites? Or they lose every time.

    What’s good for Whites?
    * Mass non-White immigration and Refugees from the Turd World? – No.

    What’s good for Whites?
    * Foreign Aid for non-Whites? – No.

    What’s good for Whites?
    * Welfare, EBT, and tuition for non-Whites? – No.

    Only Whites are FORCED to spend money on non-Whites. Get off of the Cross Whitey!

    • Respectfully, as someone who’s pretty sour cream colored, you’re full of it. I am shocked and appalled that there are people who still think this way. People are people and the way we look has no bearing on that. I actually have very little to say to this comment because it’s so amazingly horrible and despicable that I can’t find a set of polite words to say. Moreover, I refuse to dignify the absurdity and evil of your comment by giving it more than the couple minutes I’ve given it now which, admittedly, is more than it deserves. I’m sorry for you and I hope that you learn that everyone is equal.

      • Height, weight, athleticism, resistances, hormones, puberty, R/K selection, all are determined by genes. But according to you there’s some “magical quality” that makes us all “magically equal.”

        Don’t posture moral enlightenment. That doesn’t work anymore. We can get that from Libtards. You’re not “sorry” for anyone. You sound like a typical dopey White ignoramus who lives around Whites, works with Whites, has a White life yet worships the failed god of “equality” from behind a gated fence. You’re an ethno-masochist, which is not simply suicidal but genocidal. You’ve made it your religious mission like an Arab strapped with C4 to blow up and murder the chances of group identity and thus survival of your own family and lineage. You’re so far beyond stupid you actually feel self-righteous when attacking Whites for existing.

        In South Africa, while know-nothing Whites like you were screaming “racism” from a White America, Joe Slovo organized and shipped in hordes of low-IQ, sub-saharan Africans by the millions. They were singing “Kill the White Farmer! Kill the Boer!” South Africa, once a small colony of religious people like the Amish who escaped Europe, became a blood bath. Now it’s infested with 70 IQ and looks like Detroit, when it used to look like the Motor City from the 50′s, because people like you believe that evolution stops at the neck. It doesn’t.

        Go get a bone marrow transplant and you’ll magically discover that biological race still exists. Of course, you can’t verify any of this. It’s impossible for you. You’re beyond stupid. Your brain is short circuiting as you read this. The most salient feature of indoctrination is self-censorship. It’s easy to verify for anyone who isn’t indoctrinated. You’ve made “equality” a religion, which is why you speak of “evil.”

        Whites cannot love all races and not hate their own.
        Whites cannot serve other races and not steal from their own.
        Whites cannot acknowledge other races and not denigrate their own.
        To be multi-racial is to be anti-White.

    • I assume you meant the Koch brothers. Your reply was a foolish as the original post. As Christians we are one in Christ. We should never shrink from discovering the truth even when it hurts. The truth helps us to grow and adjust to the world. If daa shows that there is an IQ discrepancy between races, should we not find out if there is some problem causing it? That means being honest about the issue from the outset.

  3. So I didn’t know about Murray coming to our school until a friend of mine (who is of a race not mentioned) pointed it out to me and showed me some of the things he has written, some of which aggravated me and others which I might have agreed with at first glance. However this letter above is one of the reasons why I don’t think he should be coming to speak at a fairly conservative Christian campus. Sir in your letter you sounds like no more than a grumpy articulate racist. One who knows how to handle themselves so as to blend into society and cause minor ripples of discontent. So please, if you do still intend on paying us a visit do realize to which school you will be speaking and know that some of your ideas while written up nice and pretty seem to be legitimate are in some aspects hurtful and disrespectful to those of races different to your own. Oh and next time don’t post a whiny letter to your company website, it just makes you look like a child who got told they were no longer having McDonald’s for dinner.
    Sincerely,
    Liberal, African American, APU student, with a brain as equally as competent as yours.

    • In trying to follow this issue you didn’t succeed in pointing out what precisely is Mr Murray’s guilt. you just came up with the racist libel and repressed anger. Plus you speak as well as if everybody agrees to you. The last commentary, on the other hand clarified a little bit that Mr Murray insisted that economically, governmental welfare programs din more harm than good to your community. Can you follow the logic and stop being emotional? Because even though you invoke the brain you do not construct an argument but you are blaming without proofs. PS I got on this page by accident and followed the dispute out of curiosity.

    • Intrigued Bystander, can you provide quotes from Murray’s letter that support your accusation that he’s a secret racist? I will bet my house that you can’t, which is why you didn’t. You may (or may not) have a competent brain, but your mind is flaccid. Great job, APU!

    • I did not get that from his letter at all. I read it as a challenge to look at his writing for yourself instead of getting information secondhand.

    • Okay, fixated on race, fearful of hearing different ideas, and practically illiterate. Check. A fine representative of another school I would have zero interest in my children attending.

    • Intrigued Bystander, I am glad that your university’s president took action to protect your competent brain from being hurt by Dr. Murray’s ideas.

    • Where in your comment is this allegedly competent brain put to use? All I see is the typical ad hominems, baseless libels, and race-card shaming of a closed and uncurious mind.

  4. I know that some universities have summer reading programs, or reading assignments for incoming freshman. If APU has such a program, I would like the assignment to be Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s 1965 paper, “The Negro Family: The Case For National Action” coupled with Charles Murray’s “Losing Ground”. The first made the prescient case for the impact that the social welfare programs of the Great Society would have, and the second put data to the anecdeotal evidence of those negative impacts of government social engineering.

    Then the students would be able to critically assess this issue without the emotion or talking points of partisan politics. They might even learn something.

    • i will read moynihans paper, but i would say that if there are problems with black folks families, several hundred years of slavery, along with all the evil done to them every day of their lives, the worst must have been splitting up families, selling husbands, wives, children, grandparents, such casual evil cruelty, how terrible to know that your ancestors were treated in this way, there is no memorial for those broken people is there, are they just supposed to get over it? just move on? and still people hate them, think! people think!

      • Cora, If you were to read “Losing Ground” you would see that the data shows that blacks had recovered from the slavery experience, and that their situation with respect to family integrity was not dramatically different from other population groups. In 1950, 78% of black families had two parents. In 1967, that was down to 72%, down to 63% in 1974 and 59% in 1980. (that figure is 30% today.) Perversely, government policies provided economic incentives for poor women with children to NOT marry. (JFK addressed this issue in 1961.) Marriage to a low income man would result in a net loss of income/benefits. Exacerbating this in the black population was the great increase in black teen births, the only group to show a dramatic increase in childbirth rates. By 1980, 82% of black births were to unmarried women, the vast majority teenagers.

        Another interesting tidbit, young (16-24) black males had a higher rate of participation (74%) in the labor force than did young white males in 1960 (2.7% higher). By 1970, those numbers had reversed, and young black males were 3.6% behind their white contemporaries. This happened during a time on great economic expansion and a decrease in overall unemployment. The major difference over the previous decade was the implementation of Great Society programs that had the perverse result of hurting those it was designed to help. By the way, the labor force participation rate for young black males was down to 57% in 2010, and has continued to fall since then.

        Much of the data presented applies to all poor, not just blacks. One problem that Dr. Murray faced was that earlier statistical data did not have the same levels of detail as later data so, for some of the analysis, blacks were the statistical stand-in for the overall poor population.

      • Up until “I’ll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years” LBJ’s Great Society, the black family was 70-75% intact…with both mother and FATHER present in the home. After LBJ’s programs were implemented, the black family structure collapsed. Today, 75% of households are run by women with no father figure in sight. The only positive is for the democrat party as LBJ set up. They treat blacks as state-owned pets – feed ‘em, vaccinate ‘em and they will vote themselves more of the same.

        • Well put! Murray makes much the same point in all of his books that social pathology, not race, is the primary cause for poverty, not the other way around.

      • Cora, you do know that slavery was common throughout man’s history around the world and not really abolished until the late 1800′s and early 1900s in the muslim world. Actually slaving is still practiced in Yemen, the Sudan, Egypt and other muslim countries today.

        There were more white Europeans inducted into slavery by muslims in North Africa, some 1.5 million, than blacks into the US. Your Marine Hymn contains the words “to the shores of Tripoli” because the US Navy was created by Thomas Jefferson to combat this slave trade.

        The word slave comes from Slavic in Europe. Blacks using this long past slavery are just searching for an excuse so they can remain victims.

        • Racism is alive and well. Structural racism can be found and monitored in almost any modern academic article on educational disparity. This includes Hispanics and African Americans. Just as Native American’s were made dependent on the government purposely through policy, so are many minorities forced to live in socioeconomic poverty due to education and law. Anyone who works within social justice system knows that structural racism is effecting the marginalized.

          • This is nonsense. At one time this might have been true, but by the late seventies and early eighties, affirmative action programs were the norm and structural bias was eliminated, and in may cases, reversed. Now minorities are told that there is some insidious plot to block them from success, something they can’t actually see, but there, nonetheless. In reality, the problems with minority populations today are related to a lack of a father in the home, and an emphasis by parents away from intellectual pursuit. This does not just occur in minority populations, but also in the White population. Asians, who do not have a high rate of single motherhood, and an emphasis on education and success, do not have this problem and excel past Whites, on average.

  5. Our country’s citizens have lost the fine art of filtering. We blurt! Instead of listening we interrupt. Instead of tap-dance around issue of race or accepting whatever you read on in the internet, I challenge all Americans to practice thoughtfulness. Before you blurt out the very first thing that comes into your head, do some research, create a solid opinion and prepare for the party listening, to disagree! This is America! Be brave. Be different but be respectful to each other. It is easy to follow trends. It takes courage to respectfully disagree. Remember, you have to live with what you say and write. Your words will be part of your footprint for life.

    When our nation no longer exercises the ability to respectfully disagree yet come together, we as a nation fail.

  6. Universities today are for the most part nothing more than left wing/communist propaganda dispensers. The faculty/communist propagandists hate America and admire all who hate America, so swallow their poison at your own peril.

  7. I go to Azusa because of a gracious athletic scholarship. I have been trapped in this bubble for two years now, and will likely spend two more years. Charles Murray is correct in accusing Apu students of faculty-induced thinking. It is difficult to find students at Azusa Pacifc who have a working mind that is capable of independent thought past the biased thinking of the University(or as another has commented, the “babysitters”). Azusa should not be considered a college in reference to scholarship, for, as Charles Murray suggests, scholarship requires disagreeance. Azusa Pacifc, along with many private religious programs (yes, I will speak in a stereotypical tongue), fail to adequately develop students. All this, is taking religion out of the equation, because religion itself is not the problem. The problem perhaps lies as a result of facilitated, collegiate religion: let’s call this the “religious canopy” that engulfs Azusa Pacific. Sadly, I am trapped at this university for the remainder of my undergraduate program due to subjective units that Apy only to Azusa. Pardon My Venting.

    • I’m at APU for another 4 or 5 semesters and can’t convince myself to leave, considering how neck-deep I’ve gotten in debt. I am not your typical Christian, and it amuses me how people look at me when I speak with my friends on campus about “controversial” topics, such as American Christians being the laziest form of Christianity, or sex, or drugs, or drinking, or even Asian jokes (I’m 100% Asian myself). There is this lovely (note the sarcasm) bubble that these kids have lived in for so long that they forget that there is a world out there that is racist and harsh and doesn’t coddle the weak. The faculty has a tendency to try and shelter us from “the real world”, and it’s sad to see these all these (somewhat) brilliant minds go to waste. I think if Murray had come as a speaker, APU students would have had heart attacks in the middle of chapel (let’s be real).

  8. I go to Azusa because of a gracious athletic scholarship. I have been trapped in this bubble for two years now, and will likely spend two more years. Charles Murray is correct in accusing Apu students of faculty-induced thinking. It is difficult to find students at Azusa Pacifc who have a working mind that is capable of independent thought past the biased thinking of the University(or as another has commented, the “babysitters”). Azusa should not be considered a college in reference to scholarship, for, as Charles Murray suggests, scholarship requires disagreeance. Azusa Pacifc, along with many private religious programs (yes, I will speak in a stereotypical tongue), fail to adequately develop students. All this, is taking religion out of the equation, because religion itself is not the problem. The problem perhaps lies as a result of facilitated, collegiate religion: let’s call this the “religious canopy” that engulfs Azusa Pacific. Sadly, I am trapped at this university for the remainder of my undergraduate program due to subjective units that Aply only to Azusa. Pardon My Venting.

  9. You were going to speak at our chapel. I think it is inappropriate that my school invited someone during a time set apart for Jesus, to come talk about his book.
    This would have hurt people, especially my friends who’s families are within situations that your book describes, and honestly I would have been pissed the school did that during a CHAPEL hour we are REQUIRED to sit through.

    It seems like we are doing things for the sake of being Christian (Going to chapel) not for the sake of loving Jesus (going to chapel to learn about Jesus).

    • Good point! That sounds like a sorry confusion of worship and learning. The problem wouldn’t be special to Mr. Murray speaking, though, and would be worse, in fact, if it was some pastor who was talking on a secular subject, because it would seem he was speaking with the authority of a pastor preaching.

    • You do have a great point here. Chapel should be a time used to teach the scriptures. Unfortunately, you also seem to confuse offense with hurt. A speech such as this cannot physically hurt people. It can offend people, but it can’t hurt them. Some times it’s good to be offended; it allows us to practice being more like Christ. It also aids us in the task of analyzing our beliefs.

      Also, please reconsider your approach – wanting to learn to love Christ more – if you are going to communicate being “pissed” at being forced to sit and listen to a speaker. This is wrong on so many levels. First, it’s vulgar. As Christians, we are called to have gracious speech. Second, believers all over the world suffer much more egregious wrongs, and then are called to love and forgive their tormentors. If those in authority over you call you to sit through a simple speech, it’s something you should easily be able to handle without grumbling. Remember those who are being called to suffer much worse. (I just had coffee with a woman who fled Iraq because of Christ. This was after many of her friends were murdered.) And third, how is that you want to love Christ, but you dismiss being gracious to Murray? Can your tone not be gentler, more respectful?

      Finally, please represent your college well by proofing your text. It’s whose families, not who’s – which means who is. This may seem like I’m being extremely picky, but it goes to the heart of a great concern in our country. Many fear that universities are focusing on peripheral issues rather than teaching how to think critically and communicate effectively – which ironically, goes back to a lot of Murray’s points. Perhaps God had a plan for him being there after all.

      Grace and peace, young believer. May the Lord bless and keep you as He works out His plan in your life.

  10. C. Murray misrepresents the communication the University had with him. Murray said the reason given for the postponement was, ““Given the lateness of the semester and the full record of Dr. Murray’s scholarship, I realized we needed more time to prepare for a visit and postponed Wednesday’s conversation.” ”

    However, the major point of contention stems from Murray’s personal quote: “”I also understand from another faculty member that he and the provost were afraid of “hurting our faculty and students of color.””

    Many robust conversations and statements are based on this unverifiable quote than only Murray himself has offered. How are we to know these words were actually spoken, and spoken by someone who represents the University?

    Also, according to the University’s website, Murray’s talk would have taken place only 5 calendar days before finals week. That’s IS very late in the school year to begin a complex, campus-wide conversation. So, postponing makes a lot of sense.

    This seems more like a scheduling error than anything else.

  11. When I attended APU it was the most liberal school I had seen. So if they decided to postpone something it wasn’t for something as stupid as hurting someones feelings. It more than likely had more to do with something that had nothing to do with the subject matter. I also appreciate the approach with this post. I does not tear down the university or any person for the decision, but encourages an open minded opinion. This IS what APU was always about.

    • “Most liberal school”? Sure, considering this is a Christian institution, we’re a bit more liberal compared to schools such as Biola, but have you ever been to a public school? A non-Christian/religious university? Kids like me who have sex, smoke, and drink are the norm there. Here, it’s not spoken of on campus. There is a bubble here, and it’s real.

  12. Dear S. Rey. While literate comments follow, yours was the first in this thread that followed the general rules of the English language throughout. I appreciate what you and the Romanian ex-pat had to say and the way that you expressed yourself. Some of the comments cause me to fear for the scholarship at an institution that I’ve long heald in some regard. BTW, Noah was my grandfather, and I don’t know anyone who isn’t my cousin. Thomas Sowell and Paul Johnson have written excellent books that deal with differences between cultures. To quote Sowell (I can’t remember which book) there are no superior races, but there are cultures that are superior or inferior.

  13. There are too many comments (and many of such poor quality) that I’m not sure if this has already been said yet, so please forgive me if I am repetitive.

    I feel a need to stand up for the administration of APU (not the discussion-fearing faculty and students, mind you), especially John Wallace. As someone who has met Dr. Wallace heard some of the conversations surrounding this postponement, I really believe that his words are meant earnestly.

    This chapel lecture was to occur during Dead Week (the week before finals, for those of you who aren’t up on your college lingo). Because of this would be very poorly attended, and it would have fallen on very few, very stressed, and very tired ears…hardly an appropriate audience for engaging a scholarly and controversial subject.

    Additionally, this lecture would have been immediately followed by finals week and summer dismissal, leaving virtually no time (and certainly no willing student participants) for further interaction or discussion. I would dare to say that this whole thing is, perhaps, merely the oversight of a single chapel-booker being blown out of proportion by some hyper-sensitive and attention-hungry people.

    I’ve seen APU handle controversial material; they’ll have a required chapel lecture, an optional post-lecture in a dormitory hall, a banquet lecture following that, and faculty panel later on in the week. With so little time following this lecture to do anything of this nature, I believe the APU administration made a wise choice in postponing (not canceling) this lecture.

    I agree with Dr. Murray’s words towards the students and staff of APU, and I think the student body’s outrage surrounding his lecture only proves the fact that the University needs both more time and a more appropriate time to prepare for his speaking.

    • Good comment. It’s plausible, but the University should have fixed up a new date at the same time that it cancelled the original one. Since the late cancellation was an inconvenience to Mr. Murray caused the university’s negligence, the university should have given his talk first priority and rescheduled next fall as necessary to make the new date for his talk convenient for him.
      If that were done, an email with a list of lots of possible dates would have been OK. Mr. Murray would have responded immediately if any of the dates were ok, and otherwise a phone conversation coudl be arranged to figure out what to do.
      An email just postponing indefinitely is impolite, though. It should have been an apologetic phone call.

  14. As a 2013 graduate of APU, I’m not surprised by this. APU is an extremely sheltered community, and from experience, is proactive on siding with its faculty rather than the interests of its student body. I had multiple issues with my employer on campus, which APU took the side of the faculty member. I run a mildly controversial Facebook page focused on student expression that I was pressured to shut down because of faculty’s displeasure. I can easily say that APU has it’s main focus on the individuals who teach, rather than the student who pays thousands to learn.

    God First since 1899, eh?

  15. You weren’t welcome by the students not the school. A student and alumni mounted protest was going to take place outside your lecture this week and the school decided to cancel in response to the students outrage that you were invited. You’re right, it was their bad. But they weren’t babysitting us. Simply pacifying. That’s how the politics on campus work. You mention a gay straight alliance, they give a speech about homosexuality in chapel. You mention the necessity for a conversation on gay marriage within the church from both sides, they have a lecture the donors would agree with. But I’m very glad you weren’t allowed on campus given your history. Student’s rallied because your policies near bigotry. And those who stand in solidarity with people of color on this campus and those of color themselves, don’t intend to host you. Just as we wouldn’t host the Westboro Baptist church leaders for a lecture.

  16. This brand of tolerant intolerance is becoming commonplace for two reasons:

    1. Liberalism has become a quasi-religion and views itself as being a moral force for good. More particularly, liberals embrace a stark dichotomy, meaning there are only two kinds of white people: Liberals who are as virtuous as they are smart, and fascists who are as vicious as they are stupid.

    2. Multi-ethnic societies are the most fragile and volatile composites imaginable. The only way to maintain stability in such a society is through authoritarian rule, which means forbidding any remarks that could inflame ethnic tensions. Events in Ukraine are only the most current case in point.

    Sadly, we are finding out the hard way that it is possible to be we-are-the-world liberals, or Americans, but not both.

  17. Please forgive me, but I’m confused. I thought this was a ‘Christian’ University. You’re located in California, right? I had planned on taking courses there years ago. So, here’s my question:
    Why would a Christian school invite and/or welcome a “White Nationalist” to speak?? This isn’t making any sense. I agree that as Christians we shouldn’t be “in the dark” as it were, but to openly accept darkness into your lives, on your campus, in your heart?
    Are you guys aware of what’s happening here? Instead of debating with each other, for the benefit of this person who is clearly out to create this ‘tension’, it seems to me like you guys need to confront the school and ask them why this door was opened in the first place, because if they invite someone to speak to you, the speakers fee comes out of your pockets, your parents pockets, and – let me say it again – ‘your’ pockets.
    Christian Universities are not set up to be run from a ‘secular’ perspective. The UC and Cal State system is set up for the type of dialogue that would bring Mr. Murray to the campus. That’s not supposed to be a ‘Christian’ consideration on any level.
    The Christian school is supposed to have one responsibility, namely to make sure that everything they do is in keeping with the mission/doctrinal statement that brought you to the school.
    I’d be knocking on the door of your school and ask them who dropped the ball, and whether or not this is going to be a habit.

    • A better question is why you accept the defamatory label assigned by an organization like SPLC who labels organizations as “hate groups” for being against same sex marriage. They are an ideological mouthpiece of the extreme left.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>