Mike Adams
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to thank the Christian Legal Society (CLS) at Gonzaga University (GU) for hosting my visit. I know it was difficult to bring me here because the CLS is not recognized as an official club and, as such, had to raise its own funds for this event. The treatment of student organizations at GU is precisely the issue I wish to address this evening in my one-hour lecture.

Recently, I wrote an article criticizing GU for treating Christian organizations like second-class citizens and, in effect, bringing back segregation to a formerly respectable Catholic institution. I was shocked when the President of GU responded to readers of my article without responding to me directly by simply returning my phone calls. These calls were made to his office well before the article appeared.

President Spitzer has defended GU Law School?s refusal to recognize groups like the CLS and a Christian pro-life group by using the language of ?tolerance? and ?inclusion.? With regard to the pro-life group, he has responded to critics by saying that the problem of abortion is best approached from an eclectic perspective, rather than from a Christian perspective.

To suggest that a Christian approach to any particular problem is undesirable, simply because it is not ?inclusive,? calls into question the broader need for Christian education. If problems are best approached when not limited to a Christian perspective, it is difficult to understand why GU was established as a Catholic university. Isn?t calling oneself a ?Catholic University? more restrictive than calling oneself a ?Christian pro-life group? or, for that matter, a ?Christian Legal Society??

I am also perplexed by President Spitzer?s refusal to answer questions about the requirement that the President and the Board of Corporations of GU be Jesuit priests. Isn?t the Christian pro-life group?s desire to limit itself to a Christian membership more ?tolerant? and ?inclusive? than a requirement that they be Jesuit priests? Would President Spitzer be more willing to recognize a ?Jesuit pro-life group? or a ?Jesuit priest pro-life group??

To make matters worse, President Spitzer makes no effort to answer more general questions about the ill-treatment of members of the Christian pro-life group. They have made complaints of arbitrary harassment, which should be taken seriously in light of the treatment of the GU College Republicans (CRs) in November of 2003.

Some of you remember that embarrassing episode, which involved the removal of CR posters advertising a speech by Dan Flynn, author of ?Why the Left Hates America.? Because the posters used the term ?hates,? GU administrators ran around campus ripping them down like a bunch of hysterical children. The argument that ?hate? can be eradicated by passing ?hate speech? codes, which ban the use of the word ?hates? is an idea so stupid that only a PhD could take it seriously.

But, fortunately, President Spitzer intervened and rescinded the punishment of the CRs who stood accused of engaging in ?hate speech? for simply using the word ?hates.? So why can?t President Spitzer intervene and mandate the recognition of a Christian pro-life group and a Christian Legal Society at a Christian university?

The answer is simple: He spent his political capital last November and can?t face the militantly anti-Christian, pro-gay, and pro-abortion activists who have taken over Gonzaga Law School.

President Spitzer?s desire for the approval of others is evident in the form responses he sends to pro-lifers who criticize his refusal to intervene in the controversy at the law school. He tries to persuade them that he is a good man by reminding them that he is pro-life and always has been.

President Spitzer is pro-life. He is also a good man. And he will become a great man as soon as he is willing to bear the ostracism of the Leftists activists who presently control Gonzaga Law School.

Great men are willing to attack evil, regardless of the consequences. Pope John Paul II provides an example of such greatness with his willingness to label homosexual marriage as part of an ideology of evil. Needless to say, if he made those statements at Gonzaga University Law School, he would be hung upon a cross and crucified.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn once said that ?In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand-fold in the future.?

That willingness to keep silent may well be explained in another quote by Solzhenitsyn. He said this in 1973: ?If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart??

So, tonight I am asking you?

Suddenly, members of the Gonzaga Police Unit (GPU) grabbed a hold of Dr. Obvious. They threw him to the ground and shouted ?You are under arrest.? After replying, ?Me? What for?? Dr. Obvious was taken to Room 107 to await interrogation. When he arrived in the interrogation room, he was promptly sent back to Room 107. This ritual was repeated for several days until Dr. Obvious went mad. He never collected his honorarium. He was also discharged from his job as a Wal-Mart greeter in Boise, Idaho. His whereabouts are presently unknown.


Mike Adams

Mike Adams is a criminology professor at the University of North Carolina Wilmington and author of Letters to a Young Progressive: How To Avoid Wasting Your Life Protesting Things You Don't Understand.