The idea of free speech on college campuses and the complications of it stem from those on campuses expressing views that don’t align with popular views. Implications for students who use the idea of free speech as a method for hateful actions and comments should be reprimanded, but the question remains as to whether schools should enforce tougher limitations. The freedom of speech on college campus expands to the freedoms of religion, assembly, press, and protest as well. Freedom of expression allows students to show their own political, social, and cultural views. Removing freedoms of speech and expression have consequences deeper than surface issues.
It is important to let people express their views and discuss disagreements; that’s what democracy is. Being able to express your views and opinions is what makes America different from other countries. So why wouldn’t we allow these same rights on a college campus? Wendy Kaminer says in her essay Progressive Ideas Have Killed Free Speech on Campus, “It’s not just rape that some women on campus fear: It’s the discussions of rape.” She then goes on to talk about a university that canceled a discussion about rape because students felt like it made an unsafe environment.
Hate speech—words or symbols targeted at a particular group or person that attack or intimidate them based upon sex, race, religion, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, or gender—has recently become extremely controversial, especially in regards to college campuses. Although merely visual or verbal behaviors, hate speech can indirectly and directly cause physical and psychological harms. Philosophers Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic delve into the negative impact of hate speech in their essay “Words That Wound”, detailing exactly how supposed expressions of freedom of speech can detrimentally impact its victims. Such dire consequences thus call for targeted and threating speech to be banned in certain spaces in order to sustain a safe environment for the majority of people.
Censorship of The First Amendment This paper will discuss how censorship denies citizens of the United States our full rights as delineated in the First Amendment. It will outline how and why the first amendment was created and included in the Constitution of the United States of America. This paper will also define censorship, discuss a select few legal cases surrounding freedom of speech and censorship as well as provide national and local examples of censorship.
This part of the article states that emotional distress due to uncensored speech is now seen as enough evidence to administer punishment. I find it to be a gross injustice to punish someone for saying something that may have temporarily hurt someone’s feelings. I think that “The Coddling of the American Mind” inaccurately characterizes my peers and I. I believe that universities should protect their students but not by censoring speech. There are many things that more emotionally sensitive people can do to help prevent taking offense to the words, thoughts, and beliefs of
Derek Bok and Charles Lawrence both write about free speech and its effect on the community. In “Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus”, Derek Bok poses a discussion for the changing rules on a school campus in an effort to combat racist speech. Charles Lawrence’s article, “On Racist Speech” presents a detailed view on the history, effect and how to fix racist speech rather than give away control. In comparison, both articles broach the subject of racist speech, but Bok’s uses weak reasoning and analysis, whereas Lawrence's use of inductive and deductive reasoning, rhetorical appeals and fallacies make his the stronger article. David Bok’s reasoning for how racist speech can be solved is flawed.
Voicing your opinion is a crime during these days of age. Do we really practice freedom of speech or do we abuse the concept of freedom of speech? Students are trying to eliminate subjects, words, or ideas that are being used or taught within the college campuses that make them feel uncomfortable or offended. Based on the article, trigger warnings occur when students are not prepared to hear certain thoughts or words in which upsets them or make them uncomfortable, in other words, trigger their emotions. Lukianoff and Haidt use many examples and resources to explain why eliminating or censoring such words is an issue for mental health.
People have the tendency to take the First Amendment for granted, but some tend to use it to their favor. Stanley Fish presents his main argument about how people misuse this amendment for all their conflicts involving from racial issues to current political affairs in his article, Free-Speech Follies. His article involves those who misinterpret the First Amendment as their own works or constantly use it as an excuse to express their attitudes and desires about a certain subject matter. He expresses his personal opinions against those who consistently use the First Amendment as a weapon to defend themselves from harm of criticism.
Censorship in America can vary between the silencing of young voices and the prevention of exposing others of inappropriate material. Many people are afraid of losing their freedom of speech, as first amendment rights should be mandatory for American citizens. Polar to this argument insists the importance of censorship, as it can shield the public from information that can lead to fear or chaos. Leaving students ignorant to world problems, however, is argued by Sonja West that it removes their first amendment rights and creates a future working-class of Americans who are clouded from the truth. West is a law professor at the University of Georgia who is distinguished for her expertise in the first amendment law and minor in journalism.
Today’s college students are becoming more sensitized to the harshness of the outside world. Instead of learning to be resilient to others’ comments, they are being taught to take offense to any little word that could in some way be connected with a bad experience they might have had, and college administrators and professors are aiding this childish behavior. They are backing this movement to make adults into children. With this new movement to rid college campuses of any speech that may make anyone feel uncomfortable, students are being treated less like adults, and more like elementary children.
First and foremost, there is a consensus that whenever there seems to be the absence of reasons that are constitutionally valid to regulate the speech of students, then they are fully entitled to a freedom of expression provided they remain within reasonable constitutional bounds. More so, a choice by the administration to prohibit the students against expressing their opinion, in the absence of concrete evidence that permitting them would have had any substantial adverse effects on their discipline is a fundamental violation of the First
“The Case for Censoring Hate Speech.” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 24 July 2013, www.huffingtonpost.com/sean-mcelwee/hate-speech-online_b_3620270.html. Mears, Bill. “Anti-Gay Church 's Right to Protest at Military Funerals Is Upheld.”
Censorship in Todays America Censorship has been a topic of debate for decades. Despite the existence of the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech, the United States has a long history of censoring literature. Most Americans believe that it is unethical to stifle freedom of expression, but often some of the First Amendment’s biggest supporters are its worst enemies. It shocks many to see how rampant it still is in the present day. This paper will show examples of how governments, religious institutions, and schools try to limit first amendment rights through censorship.
Humanity needs to change before all information is censored. In “College at Risk,” Andrew Delbanco discusses liberal learning and the “whole person” that may not be developed in college due to a lack of income. Liberal learning develops the “whole person” by teaching the basic ethics and morals a person should have. Anne Applebaum presents examples of censorship in her essay, “The Decline of American Press Freedom.” She uses China and Yale to make the point that differing forms of censorship are doing more harm than good.