Nick Papasso Lanfranchi LAI 17 March 2017 Do Not Restrict Free Speech In recent years, basic ideas of free expression have come under fire on college campuses, and some administrators are beginning to censor ideas. Colleges have become too politically correct and are obsessed with censoring their students in a McCarthyism style way. In fact, college campuses are censoring, parts of history, disinviting speakers, teaching students to protest free speech, and are promoting safe spaces and micro aggressions. A whopping “71 percent of the 375 top colleges still have policies that severely restrict speech” (Lukianoff). While restrictions on student expression and its effects have become widely debated, there should be as little restrictions on …show more content…
A misunderstood term that has started to circulate a lot is 'Hate speech'. Hate speech is free speech. It is important to not get acts of ‘hate speech’ mixed up with ‘hate crimes’, because the two are very different. Hate crimes can range from vandalism to assault or murder - this should never be protected - while hate speech is simply a matter of expressing opinion, and is protected under free speech. While some of these opinions can be offensive, it is important not to shut ideas down because they don't sit well with some people. And as Erwin Chemerinsky, a lawyer and law professor states, “Often the best remedy for hateful speech is more speech” (Chemerinsky). Everyone has the right to offend as well as be offended, but in some cases, colleges have become too politically correct in entertaining ideas of trigger warnings, micro aggressions, and safe spaces. These things tend to shun any ideas expressed that are not commonly agreed with, and are often a form of censorship. Students and Administrators disinvite speakers, censor artwork, wrongfully discipline students over cultural appropriation rules, and threaten to defund student organizations and papers (Rampell). Colleges such as DePaul and UC Berkeley have taken part in this by finding loopholes to censor speakers. This usually happens to speakers and ideas that do not sit well with some people, and are excuses to wrongfully shut down forms of expression. Students should not have to worry about being censored simply because some do not agree with their opinions. Students should not be punished for purely expressing themselves, but actual threats and harassment should. Silencing points of view often have negative effects on academic
Throughout America, people place a high value in their freedom of speech. This right is protected by the first Amendment and practiced in communities throughout the country. However, a movement has recently gained momentum on college campuses calling for protection from words and ideas that may cause emotional discomfort. This movement is driven mainly by students who demand that speech be strictly monitored and punishments inflicted on individuals who cause even accidental offense. Greg Lukianoff and Johnathan Haidt discuss how this new trend affects the students mentally and socially in their article The Coddling of the American Mind published in The Atlantic Monthly. Lukianoff and Haidt mostly use logical reasoning and references to
College is full of new experiences, new people, and new communities, and many universities encourage the exchange of new ideas and diversity among students. This year, the University of Chicago sent out a letter to all of its incoming freshmen informing them that in keeping with their beliefs of freedom of expression and healthy discussion and debate, the school would not provide “safe spaces” or “trigger warnings”. Senior Sophie Downes found this letter to be misleading in many ways, including in the definitions of safe spaces and trigger warnings, as well as the issues it was addressing. Downes claims that the letter was misrepresenting the school, but also was using the letter as a sort
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.
"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
Wheeler, David R. "Do Students Still Have Free Speech in School?" The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 07 Apr. 2014. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.
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.
What if a college sponsors an activity, such as an “ugliest woman contest” where boys dress up as girls, and someone in the contest were to dress up as Aunt Jemima? At most public colleges and universities, such a display would be protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution. Wouldn’t it be nice if we didn’t have to worry about people doing such things? Wouldn’t the world be better if people had some common sense and displayed some respect for others by not doing or saying things that would alienate or offend other cultures, races, lifestyles, or sexes? Unfortunately, this is not the case and many public colleges and universities are caught in a balancing act between preserving their students’ First Amendment rights, while also trying to preserve the rights of their students to live and learn in an environment that is free from offensive language or actions.
In recent years, a rise in verbal abuse and violence directed at people of color, lesbians, and gay men, and other historically persecuted groups has plagued the United States. Among the settings of these expressions of intolerance are college and university campuses, where bias incidents have occurred sporadically since the mid-1980's. Outrage, indignation and demands for change are the responses to these incidents - understandably, given the lack of racial and social diversity among students, faculty and administrators on most campuses. Many universities, under pressure to respond to the concerns of those who are the objects of hate, have adopted codes or olicies prhibiting speech that offends any group based on race gender, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation. That's the wrong response, well-meaning or not. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects speech no matter how offensive its content.
This occurs even when the regulations arent enforced souly because they fear being punished for what they may say. As shown in Silverglate and Lukianoffs essay, some campuses go to great extents when giving students permission to give free speeches. They claim that “as long as the policy exists, the threat of enfocement remains real and will inevitably influence some peoples speech” (636). This is a valid argument because they then proceed by saying that The First Amendment calls it a clinging effect. Another effect of these regulations would be that colleges are teaching their students that their opinions and beliefs should not be shared when they are even slightly controversial. Wasserman argues that word choice is an “essential component of free-speech protection”(640) because they allow one to express him or herself
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
College campuses have always been the sites where students can express their opinions without fear. There have been many debates about the merits of allowing free speech on campus. Some students and faculties support allowing free speech on campus, while others believe that colleges should restrict free speech to make the college’s environment safer for every student. Free speeches are endangered on college campuses because of trigger warning, increasing policing of free speech, and the hypersensitivity of college students.
Correctly, hate speech codes is an efficient way to prevent offensive incidents and protect all students’ rights in order to study fairly. In addition, the effect of discriminatory harassment is much more than hurt feelings so that the harmed students hinder their ability to compete fairly in educational arena. According to the article Understanding Hate Speech as a Communication Phenomenon: Another View On Campus Speech Code Issues, "Speech codes maintain that hate speech inevitably creates an intimidating, hostile, or demeaning environment for education and university-related work.” In other words, by implementing speech codes in campuses, students truly show their capacity to earn an education in respectful environment. Notably, minority students are more likely to observe pressure by the superiority of students and realize that a violent response to fighting words will result in a risk to their own life, so, they are forced to remain silent. Indeed, speech codes are not as harmful to freedom of speech as the opponents argue, because most of them were made for the purpose of preventing speech that is not exchangeable and not protected as pure speech. In this sense, special exceptions for the content-neutral principle should be allowed on
Earlier this month in April, student protestors rioted at Berkley University because they did not want certain Conservative guest speakers to be able to give speeches at the university due to some of the speakers comments being inappropriate. According to the nonprofit organization committed to defending civil liberties named The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), "One worrisome trend undermining open discourse in the academy is the increased push by some students and faculty to 'disinvite' speakers with whom they disagree from campus appearances" (The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education). While the protesters were practicing their first amendment right to petition, the students were infringing upon the Conservative speakers freedom of speech which is unconstitutional. Just because the protesters may have disagreed with the speakers comments, does not mean that theys hould have prevented them from being able to express them. This is similar to the novel 1984 because the protestors controlled and censored what was able to be said at Berkeley University, just like how in the novel the Thought Police controlled what citizens said just because The Party disagreed with certain perspectives and didn’t want certain information to be
Ostelogical analysis is a very important process in understand our past. There are so many things that bones could tell us; the range of knowledge is great, we can determine where the remains came from their approximate age, their sex, their diet and even their death. There are so many different kinds of analysis that can be done from using ancient DNA to analyzing Stable Isotopes. Analysis of Ancient DNA hold an important key to solving the mystery of history. Using ancient DNA connections of kinship and sex can be determined.
One instance of free speech controversy was when a fraternity member of the University Of Maryland had an email leaked of which he said very derogatory and racist remarks about women and shaming them on their appearance. When this email was leaked it created a widespread of controversy and anger among the country. The difficult part in this was that by popular opinion many would want to expel the student who wrote that email but lawyers suggest that by doing so would violate the student 's constitutional rights to freedom of expression. The problem with labeling this kind of behavior as hate speech and trying to suppress vulgar language is no matter how vile the language is it is protected under the first amendment of the constitution. Universities have come together in trying to diffuse this kind of behavior by adding codes of conduct that prohibit certain forms of speech from being permitted on campus. These initiatives have been challenged by civil liberty groups who feel that by prohibiting certain forms of speech the universities are restricting students on their first amendment rights and has to be cautious on what they say as one minor joke could be taken the wrong