In the debate, “Freedom of Speech Threatened on Campus”, four panelist argued either in favor or against the motion. In this case the winners of this debate where the pro side due to their good use of supporting arguments. As for the opposing team they lost audience support due to their weak presentation of arguments. This paper will focus on one of the opposing panelist whose arguments were unsupported. Shaun Harper the Director of the center for the study of Race & Equity in Education, of the University of Pennsylvania argued that freedom speech is not threatened in universities by speech codes rather students who are judging does students voicing their opinion are the ones who are threating their freedom of speech. In order to understand …show more content…
He automatically though that because Damien attends a predominantly white campus and he’s the only African-American in his class that the professor was being racist and looking down on Damien by the way he express himself about the score he received. There could have been many reason why the professor said that to the student. It could have been because maybe Damien didn’t show during the professor class that he knew the material or maybe it seem that he was struggling during the course. The professor could have made that expression because he was shock in a positive way that Damien was able to learn the material and score a perfect score. What if the situation was to be change and the professor said that to one of the other six students with the perfect score and not Damien. Harper would not have said that the teacher was saying it in a racist manner even though he said it in the same way as he said it to Damien. It also could have been that he said it at the wrong time not taking into account that he was the only African-American who got a perfect score and Damien could have taken it as an offense. The professor never mention that he was surprise because he was the only person of color to get a perfect score so harper needed to make sure he provided more information of why he believe that the statement was racist. Then Harper argues that the students speech was suppress rather than the professors. In his speech he actually contradicts himself with what he said. The student chose that he was not going to say anything to the professor. If the student wanted to he could have let the professor know that he took it as something racist. As for this reason it cannot be said that Damien’s speech was suppress because he had choice to defend
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
Charles R. Lawrence intended audience in his article “On Racist Speech” is college students and universities. His sense of tone is forthcoming. Lawerence word choice sets the tone by using the words conspicuous,dissenter, and bigot. The article gives examples of how universities do not protect minority college students. Lawrence states that universities should protect their students He also gives an example of how universities have tried to have rules to ban racist speech yet they have proven ineffective in stopping racial slurs. The regulations have not stopped the verbal brutality yet it has stopped the occurrences of physical fights. He mentions how students do not have any need to be hurt verbally.
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
According to Harper, there is not only discrimination against blacks from whites, but also discrimination against blacks from blacks. This is especially prevalent in education. One teenager wrote Hill Harper to say that he is tired of his peers calling him a teacher’s pet just because he raises his hand in his math class. This young teenager is heckled because he appears more intelligent than his black friends and they think that he should be less interested
At this point in a college freshmen’s life, they have been in school for 14 years. Throughout those 14 years, freshmen have learned the Bill of Rights like they’ve learned how to walk and the first amendment the way they’ve learned to talk. The first amendment has been engrained in a child from the first history class in 5th grade, to the fifth history class in 9th grade and the eighth class in their senior year. In those eight years, a student has the first amendment in their head to bring to college and express themselves how they see fit and how they have been socialized to do so. According to Dinesh D’Souza, Stuart Taylor and Tim Robbins freedom of speech has been inhibited and taken out by politics and political correctness and fueled heavily by the societies need for preferential treatment.
Imagine a time when one could be fined, imprisoned and even killed for simply speaking one’s mind. Speech is the basic vehicle for communication of beliefs, thoughts and ideas. Without the right to speak one’s mind freely one would be forced to agree with everything society stated. With freedom of speech one’s own ideas can be expressed freely and the follower’s belief will be stronger. The words sound so simple, but without them the world would be a very different place.
The purpose of this paper is to explore the topic of freedom of speech and free speech zones on college campuses. This paper will answer the questions: Why have so many Universities who protect academic freedom, retreat into fear of freedom? Are school officials afraid of debate and disagreement? Are they trying to keep people (outside the zone) from hearing words that may offend someone? These questions will be answered through analyses of previous court cases, journal articles and news articles.
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
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.
The First Amendment protects the right of freedom of speech, which gradually merges into the modern perspective of the public throughout the history and present. The restriction over the cable TV and broadcast media subjected by the Federal Communications Commission violates the freedom of speech, irritating the dissatisfied public by controlling over what can be said on the air. Should the FCC interfere with the free speech of media? The discretion of content being presented to the public should not be completely determined by the FCC, but the public in its entirety which enforces a self-regulation with freedom and justice, upholding and emphasizing the freedom of speech by abolishing the hindrance the FCC brought.
When you think about America, the first thing that comes to mind is liberty. Liberty of the government and its citizens is one thing that colonists exceedingly desired during the British oppressive regime. When United States gained independence, the Founding Fathers drafted the Constitution of the Unites States, a document that has been governing our country for more than 200 years. The constitution was drafted accordingly to ensure that people’s opinions were heard. What our Founding Fathers could not foresee is that in our 21st century, The Freedom of Speech not only gives a person such a massive power, but also an opinion even if it is immoral and goes against citizens’ values.
The First Amendment is known as the most protected civil liberty that protects our right to freedom of speech. There has been much controversy regarding hate speech and laws that prohibit it. These problems have risen from generation to generation and have been protested whether freedom of speech is guaranteed. According to our text book, By the People, hate speech is defined as “hostile statements based on someone’s personal characteristics, such as race, ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation.” Hate speech is a topic of issue for many people and their right’s, so the question is often proposed whether hate speech should be banned by government.
Freedom of speech cannot be considered an absolute freedom, and even society and the legal system recognize the boundaries or general situations where the speech should not be protected. Along with rights comes civil responsib...