I find your assertion that a Christian/conservative speaker would be reflexively prohibited from speaking at UW-W dubious at best.
However, such a possibility reiterates the importance of this Churchill saga: blowhards we may disagree with must be allowed to speak so that those we do may never be denied the same right.
I have some firsthand experience with selecting guest speakers for the Forum series at UW-Eau Claire. I was there on Sept 11, 2001 to witness the outrageous speech by one Helen Caldicott, who told us Americans that it was out duty to physically storm the White house and bodilly throw President George Bush out of office.
Outraged, I got myself in a position to help choose future speakers. In this position, I contacted Ann Coulter. When she heard about our little experience with Caldicott, she agreed to come to UWEC to speak for the same fee we had paid Caldicott. (which ended up being about 1/4 of her usual speaking fee)
I took this offer to the full committee. Being 1 of 2 conservatives on the committee, the offer was voted down 5-2, with the notation that Coulter was too conservative for the Forum series.
We have to infiltrate these committees and boards and force them to at least be fair in their selection of speakers. I'm for open full honest debate, not censorship.
Maybe it is dubious, but 9 times out of 10 where does acedemia discriminate? So a certain pessimism eminates from me, hey I'm only human.