>> book tv or post to our facebook page facebook.com/booktv. booktv on c-span2, television for serious readers. [silence] good afternoon. i like to welcome all of you who have joined us at frc also watch via c-span and online lecture is abandoned truth. my maim is ian steens i'm an

intern here at frc also a student of oklahoma university. and i have the privilege of welcome withing today's speaker. the president of oklahoma wesley university dr. everett part-timer what i'm home i have the honor 6 watching hirings massive dogs when he's giving these lectures so -- which is always fun. [laughter] and his 14 years of president of the university dr. piper hass become moan for his passionate defense of intellectual friday. he advocates for cultural courage grounded in conservation of time tested truth. his commentary on religion, education, and politics challenges the symbol rangs of today's academic community. at oklahoma west lane he teaches students to follow four basic, the jesus christ the priority of scripture, pursuit of truth, and the practice of wisdom. dr. piper on eds routinely featured local and national news outlets an he serves as a regular guest on talk radio

across the nation. his most well known op-ed this is not a day care is a university has since gone viral an now basis for his new book. a native of hills dale, michigan and marci along with their two sons, seth and cobby as served as first families since august of 2002. dr. pipinger actively participates in the community and the westland church and serves on a variety of counsels and boards relating to christian leadership, public policy, and community leadership. so please help me welcome u up dr. everett piper. [applause] delighted to join you today ian i'll tell your mother and father you did a good job. [laughter] let's start. you should know your audience -- and i would suggest the audience should know their speaker. so let me clarify a couple of things. trigger warning, i do not issue

trigger warnings. [laughter] i don't believe in safe spaces and cs lewis said that he's not safe but he's good i would argue that the great lion of the academy of the ivory tower of the university of american and western universities and colleges should not be safe but indeed they are good. i don't believe that my feelings or yours are final measuring rod of what's right or wrong. i believe education should be more about facts than feelings. feelings lead to fashionism and facts lead to freedom. remember the basic fact that jesus told us -- you shall know the truth, the fact and it shall set you free. i believe in ideas and i believe in words. i believe when we lost cruise of our words we lose control of our ideas and we lose control of the debate, to when we lose control of the debate we ultimately lose

control of our freedom. for example, when we dumb down the definition of words like hate to nothing more than disagreement, we make hate meaningless. and disagreement dangerous. words matter. ideas have consequences. and one last word before i get into my lecture -- life isn't about you. education is not about you. it is not about me. george mcdonald, a writer from the turn of the 1800s to the 1900s a writer that led to the convention of cs lewis if you will. have this to say -- the core principle of hell is i am my own. i am my own king. i am the center. i am the october and i am the i could my judgment says the faultless rule of all things. the claim that we can define and

redefine everything from marriage to morality, from male to female everything from what it means to be gods and what it means to be bad this claim of god-like diety can only lead to thingly hell of making. i believe as only repentance and con that will rescue us from this fate. so i'm the guy. i'm the guy that wrote this op-ed titled this is a university it's not a day care. let me give you a little bit of a context and then we're going to launch into a little bit of a script and i'll ad lib as we with go along too. it was just before thanksgiving 2015, oklahoma wesley university sill required chapels every wednesday and friday and i received a phone call from a vice president who was the chapel speaker on this particular date i didn't go to chapel that day i had something else to do and he wanted to call me and let me know there could

be a problem and he said dr.pipy students one with of our students after chapel came to me and basically played victimization is card. he told me that i had offended him that i had singled him out and i had singled his peers out and he didn't like it. he didn't like my chapel speech. my sermon. and i said so him what did you speak on, and he said you won't believe this i'm a monster quote unquote first kringt i cans 13. now for those of you who don't know first corinthians read at many weddings love it patient, love is kind well i asked this particular vp i said give me a copy of your sermon because i know he speaks from a text he rarely ad libs if i read it i knew i would get what he said so i read through the sermon it was a simple and brief. no political humor, no sarcasm. nothing whatsoever that could be deemed offensive other than

first corinthians 13. so i was incredulous i myself an university that is as bold and clear and our marketing and promotion about who we are and why you should come there you cannot enroll without mowing who we are. you know we stand for the pursuit of truth and the practice, the wisdom you know we have a center on capitalism. free interns and constitutional liberty because we think those thins are good not bad. you know that we stand for pro-life and that we actually promote through our nursing program and our premed program that god defines life, you don't. oklahoma wesley can't be confused when you choose to pay to go there, you're buying product that's very is well defined. but yet inspite of that in my chapel at the chapel we have a student saying he department like first corinthians 13 so i want to share with you what my response was. this is the op-ed.

i actually published it on the website, the website and i also published it in the local newspaper which i have the routine of doing. and i've been doing that for a decade or so. i said to this young man, you know that feeling of discomfort you have after listening to a sermon it is called your conscience and a littler call is supposed to make you feeled baa and a some degree of guilt goal of a sermon to get you to confess your sin and not coddle you in selfishness but the church and christian faith is your con possession not your actualization so if you want to be told you're a victims and not need virtue this may not be the university you're looking for or campaign about a sermon that makes you peel less than loving for not showing love, this might be the wrong place. if you're more interest master's degree playing the hater card than you are in con it ising your own hate if you want to it arrogantly lecture rather than

humbly learn and don't want to feel guilt when you're guilty of sin and enable rather than confronted there's universities across the land in missouri and elsewhere -- that will give you exactly what you want. but oklahoma university is not one of them at oakley we teach you to be selfless rather than self-centered but more interested in you practice aring personal forgiveness than political revenge we want you to model reconciliation instead of personal conflict we believe in the con tengt of your character and more important than the color of your skin. we don't believe you've been victimized every time you feel o guilty. and we don't issue trigger warnings before alter calls. oklahoma is not a safe place. but rather a place to learn. to learn that life isn't about you. but about others -- but that bad feeling you have while listening to a sermon yeah it is called guilt. and that way to address it to repengt of everything that's wrong with you rather than blame

others for everything that's wrong with them. this is a place where you will quickly learn that you need to grow up. this is not a day care. this is a university. well, this caused a bit of a grass fire an before i knew it fox and friends and glenn beck and nbc today and stewart varney and limbaugh and cbs, and cbn national review and washington with times and washington post and "new york times" and chronicle of higher education and newspaper and great britain, and the far east -- all of a sudden interested apparently many wanted to hear what i had to say. apparently i said something many were waiting for. apparently the simple and brief response struck a cord. many who even openly disagreed with what they called my religion and my politics wrote me to say, thank you. this is long overu due. please carry on. side bar we have 3.5 million

views in about two-week period 97% of the comments were positive. 97%. there were dozens upon dozens not hundreds of people that wrote in texted -- e-mailed, snail mailed -- called, and said i don't like your religion i've checked you out. i don't like your politics i read your website. but it's about time somebody said it. thank you. so why? why? well, i believe it's because we intuitively recognize as rational human beings who are made in image of god that there's great power in what, ideas. ideas -- and that at the end of the day civilizations are built and cultures are concurred not so much by armies and navy. but by speeches, and lectures. and blogs and books, by the power of ideas much more so than that of bullets.

you guys know this you've been taught this. 1948, richard weaver told us ideas have consequences was the title of his book. you hardly even need to read the book read the title. ideas have consequences. ideas matter. few years after that, excuse me a few years earlier than 1948 hitler said let me control the text bock and i will control the state. and one said, we warn of where education can be used as a means of total power and control ideas clearly do have consequences. go ahead and evil people have recognized this. good ideas lead to good culture and good behavior and church and good corporations and good kids. bad ideas lead to the opposite. like your grandmother told you, garbage in garbage out. she was right. ideas hear the.

matter and i would argue today that education is in a total mess colleges and universities are are in crisis. the contemporary university is no longer known for pursuing truth but rather for celebrating tolerance and in the name of tolerance i'm told that my intolerance is intolerable this is nonsense it is ideological i hate you hate hadful people i'm sure of nothing sure. i'm absolutely confident there are no absolutes and i know, nothing can be then. this is humorous this is funny if it weren't so sad it is like watching a dog chase its tail. at a every turn well the result of this nonsense is tradition of good teaching has become the dark flag of tyranny almost overnight. what was academic freedom just yesterday as idiolodge fascism today instead of liberty

liberals demand conformity rather than become university and campuses in colleges have become speech codes rather than bull work of free speech. faculty and students alike are more interested in trigger warnings than they are in pursuing an across the land become in camps much more so than campuses of open inquiry are. prop began did and power now rule where there used to be a pursuit of truth our track record is horrible it doesn't matter what you believe as long as work percent you if you ever say that, shame on you. it doesn't matter what you believe, as long as it works for you. we've taught you that all morality is relative that good and evil are merely subjective social contracts year after year we preach pastor and priests are stupid that liberation theology is only good religion day in and

day out we have class resentment and racial an mouse and dmshed excellence while extolling entitlement. why are we spewed as a result our lead verse lost their courage, our congress has lost its soul. our kisdz kids lost their conscience and their character. our culture is without a conscience ideas have consequence and lousy ideas that we've been teaching in our colleges and in our universities for the fast several decades are bearing themselves o out daily before our eyes. but -- o.c.. i'm bemowning problem i think there's a solution. and i think it's found it's found in the historic, liberal arts side bar my first book, which you can find at not a day care.com. if you care as well as any subsequent writings my first book titled why i'm a liberal and other conservative ideas

what was my point? a bold conservative who believes in conserving things iemg a conservationist i believe many conserving environment and being a good steward of the water and the air and the forest and the whale and the owl. i'm a conservationist but i believe in conserving other things that are tieing, tested truth and more important and more enduring, truth. those ideas that have been tested by time and confirmed by reason and validated by experience and given to us by revelation they'll self-evident truths endowed to us by who? somebody bigger and better than you or me. the permanency of those things that should be qrved as a conservative ironically today i'm more classically liberal than my left of center counterpart. because i believe in a good robust exchange of ideas. i believe in the power of the debate. i believe that there's a right and wrong answer at the end of the hour at the end of the lecture at the end of the

argument and i think that truth is the judge not you. not me, not power, not politics not the pundit not the professor not the protest and not the pastor. i believe truth is the judge of the debate and that liberates me. to engage rather than confines me. i'm more liberal than those that often disagree with me. because i believe in liberty and liberation and freedom and justice. i believe that if you go become a thousand years to the birthplace to cradle oxford let's just say some 1,000 years ago that the university was established to liberate us to educate a free man and a free woman, culture, a free society. to give us a sense of liberty and liberation thus the word liberal. so why? why do you believe people were so interested in what i had to say?

why were 3.5 million and it is still being valid and posted the there. you're here today to hear about it some two years later -- was far become as moses and later from jefferson we were told that only by trusting in the paradox of liberty and law can we hope to protect our rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness and thereby be a people with purpose. not hapless but happy. not purposeless. but with purpose. and octave goal a measure hadding right outside of those things being measured. evident truths that are endowed from outside not constructed from inside. it was those senses around freedom that chester to know told us that you can have is no liberty without law. and you can have no freedom without senses. that how we become a free people and a free country. you see freedom trust and principle rather than people, power, politics, or pundits freedom honors debate because it

knows there's an answer, a true north or a cs lewis a measuring rod outside of those things being measured. again chesterton he told who's you get rid of the big laws this is good stuff this was worth the price are of administration when with you get rid of the big laws, you don't get liberty. you get thousands and thousands of laws that rush in if fill in the value you mean you can't live by ten simple law that's all we needed that's all we needed. ten simple laws we've refused to live by big laws jesus narrowed it down to two we can't live by ten or two so what happens? ream upon reames upon reames of little laws rushing in to fill the vac yule you see it they're being produce master's degree this city telling us how to do everything -- down to which bathroom to use.

when you get rid of big laws you don't get liberty but thousands upon thousands of little laws to fill in the vacuum academic freedom has never been found in the rules of government. the power of rouserses or temper tantrums of students rather in few and simple law of nature and naimp's god. there's a reason that dozens of universities were once with the model motto what concern you shall know the truth. and parking and the truth shallu free. there's no liberty without law and there's no freedom if you stop teaching truth. the solution to this monosense can be found in common sense. sense that is common. in self-evident truths that are endowed to us by our creator rather than self-centeredness in the arrogant and callrks s human heart and in the nature god truth of god is written on every human heart. for example, if you wanted to

dispute that, do we know that rape is wrong? do we? do we know that slavery is a bad thing? we hold these truths to be what? self-not socially constructed why? because there's a creator and it's not you. and it's not me. the solution to this nonsense is return to teaching the laws that make sense. we need to have confidence had in the laws that bring liberty and stop is teaching lies. natural law leads to freedom. manmade laws bring nothing but more restrictions, more government, more division, more control, more fashionism and less liberty. it may seem a bit redundant but i would like to leave you as i get ready to wrap this up --

with a very simple and clear message. culture is about ideas. and ideas are defined by whatsome -- words. words, words mean something. side bar, always remember that he who defines the words wins the debate. education is about words. politics is about words. culture is about words. words mean something. guess what, they have definitions. words like marriage. green, and gay, and left, and right, change and choice and right and wrong, and up and down and goods and evil. male and female, moral and immoral, all words have meaning.

and as thinking human beings and thoughtful moral agents, we do know what the definition of is is and we also know something else very important, changing and manipulating meaning of words is called something. it is called lying. we also know that deceit does bring consequences. as we're told by the prophet isaiah calls evil and good evil bittersweet and darkness light and light darkness. lying about words and worth with words turning them upside down is always wrong. self-evident as it is it should be clear to all of us. but what i'm trying to challenge you with right now words mean something.

take this couple of examples here. many who stand against going to say us -- those of white house care for religious freedom many of who stand againsts us many our stand for religious freedom do so in tolerance, a word. but their objection seems to be anything but tolerant, right? is it again they say i can't tolerate your tolerance and i hate you people i know nothing can be known and i'm absolutely confident there are no absolutes. they don't seem to recognize that everything they just said is self-refuting that every turn it makes no sense. they saw off branch upon which they sit. waving the branch waving banner of intolerance does not make you a champion of your ideal. it makes you its executioner and

doesn't take an 8th grade education to see this for what it's worth politics at its worgs. if anything but a principled argument any schoolboy can see that posed by progressives isn't really are about tolerance it never has been. so the contrary it is really more about tyranny and power, and every turn we see it on our campus and in our courts and culture angry red faces shouting you must agree with us. you must be one of us you must think like i think and do like yotd. and if you don't -- applaud what i say and what i think you will be expelled and we do not want you. in our college and surely not on our campus tolerating anything intolerable is not of interest to them. in the end their world view is not about coexistence but rather it's a poster child for

contradiction. it isn't about tolerance or freedom it's about pash fascism pure and simple but it was roman bundle of six bonged together in commonality it if you will but it could not be broken. it couldn't break it. the power of the common that's where we get the word fascist and a bundle of power. it's a group of people bound together so tightly and unbroken compliance no decent no diversity, it's the rule of the gang. it is unquestioned and unchallenged power the call to arms of these modern day jacob, you must submit. so the question we face today is rather than we want to be ruled by fascism prevailing across our land or do we want to enjoy intellectual freedom? let me ask some questions to

pingt out headlines of the past couple of years. sure our government have the power to force religious on students on its citizens siewngts i suppose too or do we have freedom to believe and behave by the dictates of our conscience unimpeded by government humorous? should the government have power to force a jewish owner of a meat processing business to process pigs? should the government have the power to force the muslim owner of a local newspaper to print "charlie hebdo" cartoons and to demand kalt lek owner of a convenient store sell bred and wine to the church for its mock. shoulded government be able to force the owner of a billboard company to sell his services to someone who wants to mock christmas or easter? if your answer is no, and i hope it is -- how in the world can you possibly think that the government should now be able to force the owner of a flower shop in washington to participate in

a religious service, a religion service that directly violates a key sacrament a sacrament of her faith? when did the government get the power to define sacraments of the church? talk about a breach of the wall of separation. should the government be able to force a catholic order called the little sisters of the poor? to buy contraception they don't want and won't use side bar they're catholic and they're nuns. they don't have sex because they're nuns they're celibate why in the world would anybody you, me, a government official presuppose to tell these women what kind of pills they need to buy in their health care? this is absurd it's insulting.

it's anything but prowoman. it's misogynistic and somebody should say so. and by the way, if the little sisters of the poor shouldn't be forced to buy contraception they don't want and don't use as contrary to their convictions, their beliefs and what they want to do with their body then u how can the government tell oklahoma wesley university faculty who are pro-life by definition that they too must submit? i'm going to go off on a little rant here. what could probably prowoman argument what could possibly be more misogynistic than ig mother the obvious fact of a female? what is more insulting it a woman than to tell her she's not a fact. you're no longer a biological

reality you're nothing but a fabrication a social contract, you're nothing but the fantasy, fabrication, the feelings of a male who wants to raise his hands on given day and say i am one. oh, but by the way i'm prowoman. in insulting you in such is a way and suggesting that any time someone else raises his hand and says i am a female, even though biology does not show it physiology doesn't genetics does not chromosomes don't show but feeling and fabrication it makes the woman, it makes the female less than a account if. you're nothing but a leprechaun and unicorn him. you're a fabrication you're a fantasy. you're making believe. i would suggest that that's anything but being prowoman. but i digress let's get become to my point. forced agreement is totalitarianism it is not tolerant. requiring women to submit to the

whim and wishes of a male driven government is not feminism it's misogyny this is ideological fascism and not freedom but a clear example a of the government establishing what religion is acceptable and then prohibiting the free expression of any religion that is in disagreement with us. sound constitutional to you? so let's wrap this one up. words mean something. students, as leaders, as community members, hang on to your words. define them, defend them. honor freedom and fight fascism. stand for truth and fight tyranny stand for love and fight hate. stand for the rights of women and fight against their subjugation and sand for liberty and liberation fight.

and remember the words of bonn who haver they mean something not to mean to act but act to act silence in the face of evil evil itself one more time not to speak is to speak not to act is to act. silence in the face of evil is evil itself. god will not hold us guiltless. there's a reason that jesus is described in the gospel of john. as what -- the word. the word. he means something. he can not be changed he's the logo he's the away, he's the truth, he's the lying he defines himself the alpha omega an alphabet jesus the son of god word made flesh and defined himself as an alphabet as a word. why? is -- why? remember his words you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. remember that he is the word made flesh.

and dwelling among us remember that he's said behold i'm coming soon. may the word, the word be your confidence and your courage as you fight the good fight to win the prize. which christ, the word with has called you heavenward, amen. you have some question, q and a? fire away. thank you as much for speaking mr. piper i would like to hear more practically so after mcen tire says when you lose this subjective standard of morality that is replaced a mote vism and respond to how you pole about things and adjudicate is through

power which seems to pretty accurately describe movement to left to make people respect the way they feel. but in response i feel like conservatives have embraced a lot of very like aggressive call them prowho go to yell back louder which makes the left accuse conservatives of being fascist. so i guess a two question one like do you think that's a wise embrace of these sort of people who try to yell become as loudly as liberals are yelling and second like how practically to try to courage open exchange of ideas and -- other opposing ideas to the left without sort of stooping to their level of aggression does that make sense is this >> yeah, i think so. again aisle i'm a christian so if that's outside your world view i guess that's okay. we're here to talk about ideas, and when i bring why ideas to te

table i bring in context of my conviction and my world view is biblical. i believe it is world view tested by time given to human freedom throughout the course of human history so let's go back to founder of this world viewee are us confronted by aned a care political or advocate pharisee let's say what did he almost always do many when he was cold fronted with the contrary question? he almost never debated. he almost always simply asked a rhetorical question. whose face is on that coin? why do you call me lord? do you want to throw the first stone? and then christ himself again if you're a christensen of god -- the word made flesh in dwelling among us smartest guy to ever walk the planet he, obviously, knew the answer i would argue he probably could have won the debate.

but he chose not to. he chose to ask the rhetorical yes that would cause the world view of his opponent to implode and more often than not they drop their stones and walk away. i think the best thing to do in a curlture prone to anger that is condescending is bold and clear, i don't think pitchlation and compromise is necessary. i don't think forced conversation about evil is necessarily the only way to go, and when i say conversation, there's some things that are not debatable. i'm not going to sit around and discuss the merits of slavery. i'm not going to discuss the merits of the holocaust or discuss the relative values of those who engage in rape. it seems self-evident to me when i engage in that conversation and ask my questions i'm not going to give any implicit ground to those bad ideas.

but that doesn't mean i get angry. that doesn't it mean i get costic that doesn't mean i get condescending employ it mean it is that i can simply and clearly ask a question that would cause the person that is advocating the contrary view to recognize the brokenness of their idea. role play. so you think slavery is okay? are you telling me black people are inferior to white? so you think -- con sheen cial sex with minors is okay? are you telling me that a ten-year-old can consent to desires and passions of a 25-year-old man?

be quiet. don't say anything. force the answer. let the world view that's, obviously, broken and wrong implode upon itself. i think that's the best strategy. hope hop i answered your question. this one down here. >> thank you dr. piper just as a question to a few of us and interns and students, and if you can kind of give us maybe a little bit of what you've experienced with students on oklahoma, university campus you gave the example of someone but kind of what we can do practically whether we go to secular or christian schools or any other religion just kind of how we can approach this problem and not only our peers but sometimes professor ares that might give us an opposite view of how we feel and what we know to be true, and kind of how we can approach these certain situations.

>> i'm going to say a couple of things that are common sense, and it's probably not true for you because my virtue of the definition of who you are you are spending summer studying and reads and putting several more arrows in your quiver if you will so that you're prepared to engage but you know very well that generally speaking very few people in your peer group or culture younger or older than you are prepared they don't read. they don't know -- how to express their ideas they may have a intuitive pells and may understand and i understand it is a biblical fact that the truth is written on every human heart. we have a general understanding whether you're -- secular or rather you're religious that slavery is a bad thing. we have a general understanding that the holocaust was probably a bad idea. so you don't have to be religious to have that general understanding they're at.

but so few people do any reading to say anything about it beyond that. so when they get in a debate they're totally intimidating and they don't know what had to do. so number one, do a cs lewis told you to do before you read a new book, maybe go pick up a dozen or so old ones and read them because those ideas have been around a while and there's a reason they've been arranged a while. that stood the test of time. so don't assume and he -- accused his own burgeon new generation of snobbery i'll be so blungt to challenge you not to fall into the same trap. don't get involvedded in chronological snobbery you think the idea considering something that's on this phone that came across your twitter feed. go read the old books that have stood the test of time and know what they say and odds are -- because they won the debate a thousand years ago they'll probably be a value in winning the debate today. that would be my first point of advice.

second is get a spine. get some courage and have some confidence. it's amazing to me it's amazing to me how few people on the conservative side of the debate have the courage and confidence to even engage at all. maybe it's because intuitive we defer to good manners. intuitively we defer to being courteous and avoiding the con thrict. because we "don't ask, don't dok relationships. that could be why conservatives are are often reluctant those are all noble things. but i would also say that christ himself tells us that if you love me you'll obey me and the lord disciplines those he loves so there is no false dichotomy of strength and discipline and love it is a mutually beneficial truth. love and discipline conflict, confrontation, if handled properly is necessary in a

loving relationship rather than contrary to it. i was on the o'reilly factor during the time say two years ago and it turned to issue of culture engagement debate at the indiana deacts and all of the conflicts that was taking place and basically the church was -- turning tail and running the other direction. afraid to engage because of the conflict. and i said to mr. riley because he brought up symbol rangs on your are anniversary perhaps it was thanks give did you sending your wife and i tolerate you card? i said i -- qowld suggest the answer is no because if you sect your wife i tolerate you card it probably didn't end very well. because why? mr. o'reilly tolerance says i could care less do what you want. i don't love you. i really don't even like you that well but i'll tolerate you. do what you want.

love says, i care deeply, stop. love says, i don't care excuse me tolerance says i don't care. do what yowpght love say i care deeply, stop so have confidence and courage get a spine do some reading understand your ideas. practice them. chuck i'm a student of chuck and he had told us that the only way you learn it so to teach it. so teach it. teach it to yourself teach it to your peers talk about it constant isly be prepared for your speech. by teaching constantly then you'll be comfortable and confident your spine will stiffen. you can do it without getting angry because anger is always the last resort emotion is always the last thing when you've lost the ability to be logical and to make sense. you know, you see it. you see it, so often and a political debate people will digress to the name calling. to the --

nonand die because that's ground in feeling rather than stay on point and if you have the ability, conviction to stay on point because you practiced, you'll be be the only one in the room that has it. >> i was wondering if you could i'm trying to figure out what could be observance offensive about first corinthians did you ask it was a male. what was wrong what's wrong with first corinthian 13 i mean it's baffling. >> it is baffling it causes your head to spin and answer is no i never went to the student specifically and there's a reason for that because this became a public issue, i didn't want him to feel that he was being -- called out publicly and believe it or not, i'm told to this day that that student did not know the article was about him.

believe it or not which tells you something you might say how is that possible? only reason it could be possible is if he believed that there were several students that shared his view and it must have been about them not him. est that part of the answer. other part of the answer is what was so offensive about it i have no idea other than it made him feel uncomfortable and discomfort apparently in our campuses where discomfort is not possible. any idea that make you feel bad is bad to good education and to safety that's nonsense. going back to what i said earlier because i think it's powerful. maybe you don't. cs lewis great lion kids are talking to mr. and mr. beaver in lion witch and wardrobe they ask mr. beaver, is aslin safe and he say, of course, not. not safe, but he's good.

so you paraphrase that good line of a liberal arts, the great line of the academy, the greatle great lion of the ivory tower is it supposed to be safe? or is it supposed to be good ? there's a huge difference sir i think we're actually at a time where if ideas don't make you feel comfortable and safe, unchallenged that those ideas can be askewed those ideas can be labeled as bad ideas. and that is not the measure of a free society that's the measure of ideological fascism that's not the measure of intellectual freedom. if you haven't read first corinthians do what this gentleman said read it and you tell me the sense of that other than it may make you feel uncomfortable for not measuring up. good. i'm glad it does. i'm glad it does.

i'm not interested in -- i'm not interested excuse me i'm not interested in cobbling you or comforting you at my university i'm interested in confront you because when you graduate i want you to be a man and a woman of character. i'm not going to say congratulations you've got an opinion. [laughter] you majored in opinions good for you. you have a degree in opinions. how absurd is this? this is lunacy. i actually hope you learned something. that's right and wrong and just and i want you to know what -- how it juxtaposed to injustice and i want you to know some truths relative to nursing and accounting and biology, and philosophy, if you don't know anything that's true and you graduate i would suggest you waste where are time and money you don't get a dloam ma in opinions because opinions mine and yours don't matter on graduation day. i don't care what's your opinion. i really don't. and you shouldn't care that much

about mine. opinions always lead to bondage and slavery pot and hillary and those this in history had had opinions it didn't end very well. jesus told you you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. yes, ma'am. >> so i was at a conference recently at american university, and one of the au government professors came and discussed trigger warnings in spaces he believe it should be mandatessed across campuses i was only one against trigger warnings so thought it was easy to shut it down to flaws except on the fact when he said well what if there's a person with a war veteran or someone who has been raped and you're coming in talking about a certain topic that could bring back ptsd so how could you combat that situation on trigger warnings? smg i would argue that the christian ethic the biblical world view defers to love.

okay, and in such a situation if somebody has a technical disorder or dysfunction such as -- ptsd, then, of course, we're going to be compassionate, that individual recognize that we shouldn't ignore them. be cruel to them, expose to greater harm. but this is what afternoon happens in the progressive left of the debate they will take an isolated incident, the anomaly the aberration, the brokenness of our world and then they'll break all of the rest of the world to measure up to that anomaly as if that is the standard now. rather than recognizing by definition it's not the standard. by definition, it is different. it is dysfunctional. there should be correction from it to the norm. rather than are moving the norm downward we should love the fern enough to bring them upward.

so, of course, we recognize the anomaly. we recognize the brokenness. but we don't break everything else because of it. we try to correct it. that would be my response to that particular question. i think that last in first 13 is like trigger warning passage you know, bare all thing, believe about treating people with kindness, love an interesting way to sort of think about it. but kind of answers the problem from a christian perspective but it doesn't go into ideological and be kind to people. >> exactly. >> right so somebody is offended employ principle of corinthian 13 but ironically if that which is the solution -- becomes offensive to me because everything is subjective everything come down to me, i'm god, about you are not god is

not i am god, i would argue today that we seem to be more interested in praying to the god we see in the mirror about than praying to the god we see in the bible and i would argue that the end result of that is not positive. there has to be a measuring right outside of those things being measured lady justice has to be blind when she takes blindfold off and putting her thumb on scale then there's justice is lost. truth is non existent power always will trump principle. there is no correction. there's nothing self-evident everything is self-constructed. everything is self-refort and come to the point so say the solution which has been obvious for 2,000 years love is patient, love is kind, is the problem because i don't like it. and i'll define things in my own m imagine like narcissist gazing image in a pool we slip, we fall

in, and infatuated with ourselves we drown, and all that's left is the one named echo pining after the lost of such wasted beauty. if that's what we are coming as a culture today. we're on the pool ready to slip and fall in. we might be qiez to recognize that that thing we see in the mirror is not as grnd and glorious as we think. that there might be something actually better. bigger -- more permanent than that it's worth thy of conservation and that is only that that will give us liberty, liberation and freedom at the end of the day. thank you. [applause]