DEBATE, DIALOGUE, DISCUSSION

The Quilliam University Society is built on one simple principle:
To promote the values of universal human rights as a means to counter extremism across all political spectra.

 

OUR CONSTITUTION – POINT OF CONTACT

To view the constitution containing information about Quilliam University Societies, its philosophy, aims, relationship to the Quilliam Foundation, and FAQ’s – please click here.

For any more information on the societies, or if you would like to get in touch, please contact us.

OUR MESSAGE

For the promotion of universal human rights, and that faith can be part of that promotion. Partnering together to promote the message of human rights as a means to counter the messages of extremist ideologies across the political spectrum. Safe-guarding our liberal secular democracy & freedom of speech on campus – championing the right to debate.

The Quilliam Societies will promote these aforementioned values in unison with existing societies and students that have consistently strived for these ideals.

The society will aim to educate that human rights has no “but” i.e. “I believe in rights for all but…”, “I believe in freedom of speech but…” and promote that instead, these are universal human rights with no restraint.

These societies will aim to promote universal values and challenge extremism through debate, dialogue and discussion.

OUr CAMPAIGN

Our #RightToDebate campaign states that no speaker need be banned, unless they are in breach of the law. Quilliam, nor its university societies, advocate for the banning of any speaker on universities that does not incite to hatred and violence.

Instead, Quilliam societies believe that these speakers should be engaged with and their ideas challenged. We will adamantly push back against any policy that curtails freedom of speech on campus, arguing instead that freedom of speech needs to be expanded to counter extremism on campuses, by bringing in speakers to counter extremist narratives.

We believe that students will feel safer knowing that contested platforms are given to extremist speakers who would have otherwise created an echo chamber for sentiments intended to make certain students feel threatened/unwelcome based on their religious/political-ethnic-cultural-sexuality-gendered identity.