Were we really welcome?

‘Welcome’? Were we really?

Were all of the ‘filthy people’, allegedly worse than ‘pigs and dogs’, welcome to listen to the cleric’s wise words?

Oh no, sorry, we’re worse than animals, forgive me for insulting them. To whoever created that poster, perhaps your choice of the pronoun ‘all’ was slightly incorrect and used all too sparingly?

Aside from the very few people that have the same archaic views on gay sex/relationships as Menk, the large majority of people that attend the university are living in the 21^st century and accept gay rights as human rights.

For a university that takes such pride in having a ‘safe’ campus, to allow someone who quite publicly and intensely makes known his viciously negative attitudes towards the LGBTQ community so widely known is disgraceful. Rightly so, the society made their views known to those in a position to do something about it.

Whatever that something is, we are still waiting for it. I’m sorry but stating you will ‘be releasing more information next week, simply isn’t good enough from a Students’ Union that is supposed to be one of the best in country.

Mufti Ismail Menk

Despite the union having a ‘no platform policy’, which is apparently in place to: “avoid legitimizing racist and homophobic propaganda”, the talk was still to go ahead before it was cancelled by the Tayyibun Institution, a leading independent Islamic institution in Britain.

While Menk’s speech wouldn’t have been on the topic of sexuality and thus, wouldn’t directly be slandering the every move of gay people.

Everyone is still fundamentally aware of the fact that he has done so previously due to the vast amounts of publicity he and his views have received. Plus, with everyone using a little thing known as the internet really quite regularly, it’s hard to not have heard about it.

A number of people also raised the topic of freedom of speech in regards to this issue but as my good friend and Publicity Officer of the LGBT*QA Society, Emily James, quite grandly and succinctly proclaimed: “Freedom of religion is not a right to persecution.”

the large majority of people that attend the university are living in the 21st century and accept gay rights as human rights.

 We talk about freedom of speech. That’s all well and good. But by no means does freedom allow one individual or a collective religious group, to persecute, oppress, or even discriminate against an established community of people. As another member of the LGBT*QA society, Rob Durdin, said: “there is a difference between free speech and hate speech.”

While I have by no means, commented on every aspect of this issue that I find unacceptable, amoral and, quite frankly, disappointing on the part of the universities non-action (which, by the way, gave a very useful and striking comment that has more than likely been copy and pasted from a thousand other replies to complaints, wimpering that “…We do not support the views of external speakers.” This, in my opinion, couldn’t have made less of an impact due to its lack of follow up.)

I do believe that summarizing the issue and accurately pinpointing exactly the question yearning to be answered by all of the LGBTQ society, is one that was raised by Mairead Mulcahy and remains important despite the cancellation of the tour, do “they (the University) care more about his right to free-speech or our right to exist without persecution?”

In other words, why doesn’t the university have the ability to stand up and keep campus the safe environment it claims to be for its students in situations such as this one, instead of simply stating its lack of authority and control?