The radicals who dominate campus discourse today propagate the deeply anti-intellectual claim that some beliefs must simply be taken as inherently true, with no basis for disagreement. This line of convoluted logic is frequently used by campus radicals to discourage debate, viciously silence speakers whose views they find objectionable, and organize “safe-spaces” to shelter people from ideas with which they may disagree, claiming that these ideas make them feel “unsafe.” By offering admission to those who feel that their views are too pious to explain, the admissions office is fueling this intellectual pollution.
This is a straw man and an ableist position. There is the hype about safe spaces, and then there is the truth about safe spaces. I don’t know whether this applicant should have been accepted or not, seeing as I only know about one element of his application, but I do know it’s best not to invoke the Fox News perspective on safe spaces as a rationale for why not.