It seems every time you turn on the news, there is another story talking about free speech on campuses around the country. Many of these stories involve students protesting offensive speakers from talking at their universities. According to the article Free Speech or Safe Speech, protesting has become intense and dangerous. Students believe these offensive speakers create a hostile environment and interrupt their education and they therefore, should not be able to speak at their school. These students believe campuses should be a “safe zone from hate speech” (“Free Speech or Safe Speech”, 2017). This has caused a lot of outrage which, has sparked a big debate surrounding free speech on campus. In a recent news article, a congressional hearing, …show more content…
One opinion both sides could agree on is that freedom of speech on campus needs to be addressed but, should offensive speech be banned? Freedom of speech discord on campus has been around for years but in the past few years it has become different. Erwin Chemetinsky (2017), the dean at Berkley Law School, explained that in the past many students wanted to speak out and hold demonstrations but, felt silenced by the campus administration. On today’s campuses, the controversy is …show more content…
The first amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” (U.S. cont. amend. I). The first amendment grants a person freedom of religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. It protects citizens of the United States from Congress supporting one religion over others and restricting an individual’s religious choice. This enforces separation of church and state. The first amendment guarantees the right for society to come together and to petition their government. It also allows society the freedom of expression, so congress cannot silence the press or person who is speaking freely. This possibly is the most important to Americans - freedom of speech. In the article The ‘Right’ to Disrupt Free Speech On Campus, the author George Leef (2017) states, “When students disrupt events where speakers are trying to make arguments they dislike, they always say that their conduct is justified”. Most students say they are protesting hate speech, which isn’t protected by the First Amendment. Leef explains that these student’s arguments have a major flaw. The First Amendment does not have a “no exceptions for hate speech” (Leef, 2017). There is zero language used to
He aims to expound to the reader why hate speech shouldn't be included in the freedom of speech, at least on university premises, while reassuring the audience that he understands that the freedom of expression is highly essential and difficult to restrict in terms of hate speech. According to his statements, students who are subjected to racist instruction could even consider filing a lawsuit "on behalf of Blacks whose right to an equal education is denied by a university's failure to ensure a non-discriminatory educational climate" (Charles 18). To help the audience grasp the gravity of the issue, Charles chooses to explain how hate speech might escalate within legal
This shows how the freedom of speech the students had was good for them in the future and also our community. “An amicus curiae brief filed by the U.S. National Student Association, composed of college student governments said that allowing more freedoms to students would get them ready for college and make them better citizens” (The First Amendment: Tinker v. Des Moines). According to the brief, more freedom equals better community and better college preparation. This helps the students do better. By giving them more freedom it makes a better future community.
In rarer cases some will protest on things that may cause fights. The college campus has the right to shut down a protest if it may cause a fight. This is said under the category “Fighting Words” in the first amendment. Its states that if the protest may cause the intended audience to commit an act of crime, the protest should be dismissed.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech”. Some people in today’s time would argue the first amendment is one of the most important listed in the Bill of Rights. Many forms of speech are protected by the first amendment that one wouldn’t think would be such as flag burning and “adult videos”. Over the years there have been many different court cases that have debated and fought the forms of speech that are protected. Many people in society treat speech differently and this is given in the United States because there are such diverse groups throughout the nation.
The first amendment may seem like something that is generally understood among all of those who use it, but this may not be the case. While most citizens of the United States of America would certainly say that they understand and can comprehend what the first amendment means, an underlying lack of knowledge, upon what is presumed to be the most important of all the amendments, can still be discovered. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The specific piece of the first amendment that is particularly important
The controversy over where free speech should be considered unacceptable continues on, even around the Vietnam War. In recent days, college students around the country have been adapting to the idea of having ordinary public “safe spaces.” Safe spaces are basically areas that people can go to, where their opinions won’t face challenges, ridicule, or criticism in any shape or form. This could easily compare to a more “official” way of plugging your ears to avoid someone’s opinion that you don’t find agreeable. As well as many people believing that safe spaces are childish and coddling, others add that safe spaces are also a restriction on everyone’s ability to speak freely, implying that safe spaces actually do become commonplace.
The ability to speak freely is written in the bill of rights and has been preserved for decades, but when free speech turns into hate speech it brings up the widely deliberated issue about banning hate speech. There are many different perspectives on the issue of hate speech. Author of Hate Speech is Free Speech, Gov. Dean and Law professor, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, applies a strong historical perspective on the situation arguing that people are “constitutionally illiter[ate]” when they make the claim that hate speech is not part of the First Amendment. Believing that it is impossible to ban hate speech because everyone will always disagree with any idea, Reynolds focuses on the problems with banning hate speech and what might happen if hate
Trigger Warnings on College Campuses Rhetorical Analysis Writers Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, in their article “The Coddling of the American Mind”, detail the effects that safe spaces and trigger warnings are having on college campuses. They claim that “in the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don’t like” and add they will explain “why that’s disastrous for education and mental health”. Through the use of the word “increasingly”, the writers recognize that not all students are following the damaging trend, but instead it is becoming progressively prevalent and as a result needs to be addressed. Throughout the article, explanations are given for the stance against shielding students from opinions they find oppressive, as well as ways to combat and fix the problem. Through this, the writers hope to promote a college experience where students can feel safe and
In the “Bethel School District v. Fraser” case, Fraser believed that the school violated his first amendment “freedom of speech” rights. Fraser gave a speech with some inappropriate content in it and the school gave him a three day suspension because two teachers warned him before he gave the speech. Fraser took it to court and the justices said they would shorten the suspension and let him have his right to speak at graduation because the school was taking away his freedom of speech.
Based on the first amendment which states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”. We the citizens of the United States have the freedom to choose and practice our religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press and freedom of petition. Although this amendment seems to be beneficial for the general public it actually does more harm than good. I do not believe that there is in fact a such thing as freedom. Freedom means the power to act, speak or think as one warns without hindrance or restraint.
1 | P a g e FROM ENGINES TO OBSTACLES THE EFFECTS OF REGULATING SPEECH ON COLLEGE CAMPUSES BY JOSH RUDD In the United States today just about everyone – famous celebrities, politicians, colleges, major companies and corporations, average people, and even radical groups like Antifa and the Altright –claims to support free speech. But when pressed, many people admit that some viewpoints or ideologies are simply too radical and need to be regulated or even banned. When a person or organization claims they support freedom of speech, they often mean that they support freedom of speech which isn’t offensive. This contradiction of simultaneously supporting and restricting free speech is most blatant on college campuses in the U.S. today, where freedom
Free speech and hate speech can be classified as different topics and when arguing for one, we can also criticize the other. Free expression and free speech on campuses are crucial for sparking important conversations about equality and social justice, and the suspension of free speech and expression may have dire consequences on college campuses. First, freedom of expression allows students to show their own political, social, and cultural views, while also allowing students with common beliefs to align. Free speech and the call for free speech allows those who have been historically systematically oppressed to use their voice.
In Nat Hentoff essay, “Should This Student Have Been Expelled?” he debates that freedom of speech should be valued no matter how it is taken by others. The one example that pops out to me is the student at Brown University, Dough Hann. He states many offensive things about several people and is expelled because it was not the first time something like this has happened. Freedom of speech is difficult subject that has many different views on it.
Free Speech on Campus by Nat Hentoff is an interesting article in which Hentoff tries to prove that free speech is not on all college campuses. In the essay Hentoff uses examples such as fliers, professors, and guest speakers to get his point across. Hentoff says, “how are they going to learn to identify and cope with them” (para. 10), this to tell us about the protection of students from bad ideas. These attempts to protect are taking away from their first amendment. Hentoff feels that we should allow them to choose what ideas are bad.