It seems as if America is constantly debating, constantly trying to decide between right and wrong. In the midst of these heated debates, people tend to verbalize their thoughts in a harsh, and at times offensive manner. This is commonly seen with young college students who are starting to develop their political, and ethical democratic duties. Free speech is a basic constitutional right, but at what point is it taken too far? Is it when a minority group is targeted and demoralized? Or is it when students become desensitized to others’ emotions? And if it is taken too far, should private colleges punish such behavior? In his article, “Feigning Free Speech on Campus,” attorney, Greg Lukianoff wrongly claims that colleges are depriving students of their constitutional right to free speech by enforcing speech codes. By focusing on constitutional rights, Lukianoff overlooks the danger of intolerance. …show more content…
When discussing the effects speech codes have on students, he states, “In doing so, they discourage civic engagement at a time when debates over deficits and taxes should make young people pay more attention, not less” (Lukianoff 2). Lukianoff fails to address that speech codes are not meant to silence students, but instead to provide an ethical guideline for more civilized debate. On the one hand, I agree with Lukianoff’s belief that all persons should express themselves freely. But, on the other hand, I still insist that such expression should be done in an educated and respectful manner. Instead of discouraging civic engagement, speech codes encourage mindful discussion with necessary boundaries to achieve a more effective way to approach issues and debates within
In the world today, Freedom of Speech is taken to a different level than what one may imply verbally. With social media, political debates, and the outpour of sexual orientation the First Amendment is exercised in its full capacity. Protecting Freedom of Expression on the campus is an article written by Derek Bok expressing his concerns regarding the display of a confederate flag hung from a window on the campus of Harvard University. The Confederate flag to some is a symbol of slavery and to others it is a symbol of war, or perhaps known as the “Battle Flag”. In this paper one will review Bok’s opinion of the First Amendment, clarity of free speech in private versus public institutions and the actions behind the importance of ignoring or prohibiting such communications according to the First Amendment.
Benjamin Franklin once said, “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.” Indeed, free speech is a large block upon which this nation was first constructed, and remains a hard staple of America today; and in few places is that freedom more often utilized than on a college campus. However, there are limitations to our constitutional liberties on campus and they, most frequently, manifest themselves in the form of free speech zones, hate speech and poor university policy. Most school codes are designed to protect students, protect educators and to promote a stable, non-disruptive and non-threatening learning environment. However, students’ verbal freedom becomes limited via “free speech zones.” Free Speech Zones are areas allocated for the purpose of free speech on campus. These zones bypass our constitutional right to freedom of speech by dictating where and when something can be said, but not what can be said.
So, what is college hate speech? According to Griffin, Sullivan, and Robertson (2010), hate speech is
How much we valuse the right of free speech is out to its severest test when the speaker is someone we disagree with most. Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life promises the same constitutional protection as other speech because the right of free speech is indivisible: When one of us is denied this right, all of us are denied. Where racist, sexist and homphobic speech is concerned, I believe that more speech - not less - is the best revenge. This is particualrly true at universities, whose mission is to facilitate learning through open debate and study, and to enlighten. Speech codes are not the way to go on campuses, where all views are entitled to be heard, explored, supported or refuted. Besides, when hate is out in the open, people can see the problem. They can organize effectively to encounter bad attitudes, possibly to change them, and imitate togetherness against the forces of intolerance.
Some colleges are considering speech codes and regulations on campus due to allegations of racist speech and harassment. Although the reasons are legitimate concerns, these codes should not be placed on students because they do not only violate The First Amendment, but also promote administrative abuse of power, along with causing students to self-censor their speech, while teaching them to hide and or suppress their unpopular beliefs. There are some such as, Cinnamon Stillwell and Charles R. Lawrence III, which are in favor of speech codes because they consider some of the actions a form of harassment. While others such as, Harvey B. Silverglate, Greg Lukianoff, and Howard M. Wasserman oppose the codes and regulations because they insist that
"Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, published in Boston Globe in 1991, is an essay about what we should do when we are faced with expressions that are offensive to some people. The author discusses that although the First Amendment may protect our speech, but that does not mean it protects our speech if we use it immorally and inappropriately. The author claims that when people do things such as hanging the Confederate flag, “they would upset many fellow students and ignore the decent regard for the feelings of others” (70). The author discusses how this issue has approached Supreme Court and how the Supreme Court backs up the First Amendment and if it offends any groups, it does not affect the fact that everyone has his or her own freedom of speech. The author discusses how censorship may not be the way to go, because it might bring unwanted attention that would only make more devastating situations. The author believes the best solutions to these kind of situations would be to
Dazey, Josh. “Campus puts students at undue risk: while restricting “basic natural rights”. Ifeminists. Feb 12, 2002. http://www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2002/0212b.html
In the United States, free speech is protected by the First Amendment in which it states, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion … or abridging the freedom of speech.” Now, nearly 250 years into the future, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were afraid of is starting to happen. Today, our freedom of speech is being threatened through different forces, such as the tyranny of the majority, the protection of the minority, and the stability of the society. Now, colleges and universities in the United States today are also trying to institute a code upon its students that would bar them from exercising their right to speak freely in the name of protecting minorities from getting bullied. This brings us into
In Camille Paglia’s essay “Free Speech and the Modern Campus”, Paglia discusses her views on free speech on college campuses and how she believes that the idea of free speech has changed over time. The essay was published back in May of 2016 on the website SmartSet. Paglia talks about the current controversies regarding free speech on campus and how it is the second wave that erupted while she has been teaching college. Along with her many details that she lays out in her essay, she also gives many examples of the violation of free speech rights. She gives her reasoning for why the problem of free speech has returned and who there is to blame for the outbreak.
Freedom of speech is the right of civilians to openly express their opinions without constant interference by the government. For the last few years, the limitations and regulations on freedom of speech have constantly increased. This right is limited by use of expression to provoke violence or illegal activities, libel and slander, obscene material, and proper setting. These limitations may appear to be justified, however who decides what is obscene and inappropriate or when it is the wrong time or place? To have so many limits and regulations on freedom of speech is somewhat unnecessary. It is understood that some things are not meant to be said in public due to terrorist attacks and other violent acts against our government, but everything should not be seen as a threat. Some people prefer to express themselves angrily or profanely, and as long as it causes no har...
Colleges and universities control their faculties and students’ actions by shaming and criticizing their faculties and students on social media when the faculty’s or student’s actions cause distresses to other college students. They also control their faculties’ or students’ actions by firing the faculty or suspending the student. In an article that is posted on the website Newsweek, Nina Burleigh states that “American college campuses are starting to resemble George Orwell’s Oceania with its Thought Police, or East Germany under the Stasi. College newspapers have been muzzled and trashed, and students are disciplined or suspended for “hate speech,” while exponentially more are being shamed and silenced on social media by their peers. Professors quake at the possibility of accidentally offending any student and are rethinking syllabi and restricting class discussions to only the most anodyne topics.” The idea American colleges and universities are compared to the Stasi, the secret police of East Germany, or a thought police shows how dangerous and restrictive college campuses have become. This quote also cites the fact colleges have tried to censor their own newspaper as one of the examples how dangerous campuses have become. The fact that colleges try to censor their own newspaper and to intimidate their professors is troubling because this fact indicates that American colleges and
But is there a point where one person’s right to freedom of speech interferes with a student’s wellbeing? Colleges and students should commit to academic freedom as it leads to a more enriching learning experience. Speech and debate is a very crucial part of one’s life. Engaging in speech and debate allows the student to practice listening, learning, and oratory skills. In order to achieve the highest of learning, one must actively participate in speech and debate.
Ideas never stop moving, they are driven from place to place until they are fully executed. Such processes of thinking help a person to stand firmly on a side of an argument or also serve to help them understand other unfamiliar points of view on different discussions. Although many universities hold and restrict the most absurd and broad speech codes that constrain students from voicing their judgment about something, it is extremely important that restrictions stay at a level in which speech is limited only if it actually deems any form of physical harm or death to anyone. With high-level education institutions not restricting any form of speech, students will be able to comfortably learn to voice their opinions on any topic without fear of feeling pursued or
Freedom of Speech is defined as the right for people to express any opinions without censorship or restraint. Multiple people believe that freedom of speech has to do with what a person says verbally. This is a false assumption seeing that there is a speech in symbols such as a picture and a “tattoo” (Kendrick). Anyone can see a symbol and immediately believe that it is offensive to their religion, or what they believe, after all, “all speech is symbolic” (Kendrick). Many people are punished for speaking their minds due to the unsafety that people have when speaking freely, considering that they attack a person.
And all the people living there didn't have the current rights that we Americans have today. So, why should the students be treated like people back then who didn't have any rights what so ever. " Free speech advocates have argued that these types of policies could create a chilling effect on student speech, and that students — particularly college students who are off-campus — still have First Amendment rights. " Most students have opinions that need to be heard but because the rules are limited these certain students can't have their voices heard. They make talk to their friends about their opinion but what can they do other than agreeing or disagreeing with the student's opinion.