This is where it could get very interesting regardless if you think these guys are mega dicks or free speech heroes. If it turns out that the rules are too nebulous or infringe upon their civil rights then the university will have potentially taken away their ability to be dentists for effectively(legally not morally) no good reason. This then opens up the university to a lawsuit for lost wages. So we must now assume that students who are halfway through their 3rd year have a very good chance of being dentists. The lifetime earnings of a dentist would easily run into the millions. So the university needs to then multiply that loss by 13.

Then the university would be looking at eating some of that with the rest covered by insurance but then their insurance rates will go up for a long time.

I am always happy to see a dickhead get what is coming to him but this might not be a free ride for the university. No court will take into consideration their being dickheads, it will only look at things like the law, the contract, and civil rights.

What I am saying is that this is very very dangerous ground for them to be treading on. A simple test of how dangerous it is would be to see what the legal ramifications of the university not doing anything would be. Other than much outrage it could actually be zero.

Let's look at this from a slightly different point of view. Let's say that I sell pork to China from Halifax. Let's also have me regularly text some of my misogynist friends misogynist texts that would really offend most women in Halifax if they were made public. Now let's have someone find one of our phones and publish the texts. Should the government step in and ruin my ability to export pork? Should my products be banned from going through the port of Halifax? Should I be denied a business registration? Should the meat inspectors not come to my business any more?

Basically all that would make sense would be that people might contact my customers and encourage a boycott. But for the government to take action against someone who is offensive would be a very very dangerous precedent to set. I can certainly make a long list of people who I strongly disagree with but I would fear for Canada's future if I were somehow able to ban their speech. If they aren't fully intending to cause crimes to occur then it should be lumped into not-a-crime regardless of the level of offence caused.