Free Speech Codes In Schools Research Paper

“A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense” (Lukianoff and Haidt 44). Colleges are sheltering their students from words and ideas that students do not like or are found to be offensive. Affecting their education and cognitive skills, scientists are warning colleges to refrain from coddling the students and allowing other viewpoints to be spoken. People are speaking their minds, saying their own views; however, some people are over sensitive and take these viewpoints offensively. In the article “The Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt successfully argues using rhetorical questions, specific examples, and affective visuals that protecting college students from words and ideas deteriorates their education and mental health.

“Over the years, courts have ruled that college officials may set up reasonable rules to regulate the ‘time, place and manner” that the free speech can occur, as long as the rules are “content neutral,’ meaning they apply equally to all sides of issues” (Fisher, 2008). Speech codes and free speech zones on campus do exist for many reasons: many of the causes or topics that students or others looking to interact with students take up are controversial and can frequently take on less of an academic or social justice overtone and more of a hateful one. Hate speech is the greatest threat to freedom of speech on college campuses, and the limitations colleges and universities put on student’s verbal freedoms are largely in place as efforts to avoid it. Religion, in particular, is a hot topic on campuses and it has an unfortunate tendency to become more aggressive and argumentative than universities would like. However, under the First Amendment, individuals do have a right to speech that the listener disagrees with and to speech that is offensive and hateful. It’s always easier to defend someone’s right to say something with which you agree. But in a free society, you also have a duty to defend speech to which you may strongly object.

If you keep a close eye on the news, you have heard of situations dealing with the issue of free speech on college campuses. This topic has been a hot button issue throughout recent years. Numerous institutions have become more politically correct in an effort to make their students feel safer on campus. Many people, however, claim that “word policing”, or telling students that they are not allowed to use certain vocabulary, is a violation of their right to free speech. In the articles “The Betrayal of Liberty on America’s Campuses” by Alan Charles Kors and “’Nigger’: The Meaning of a Word” by Gloria Naylor, readers are shown just how ridiculous the practice of word policing can be. Additionally, the article “Regulating Racist Speech on Campus” by Charles R. Lawrence III challenges the common arguments in favor of word policing. Based on the evidence presented in these articles, I believe that word policing is preventing college students from having honest and educational conversations on campus.

Harvey A. Silvergate stated in his article, “Muzziling Free Speech”, that “Our entire Country is a free speech zone, and that our campuses of higher education, of all places, cannot be an exception.” Free speech, in the form of hate speech, should be not regulated on American college campuses. Should hate speech be discouraged? Of course! However, developing policies that limit hate speech runs the risk of limiting an individual’s ability to exercise free speech. The University of California System’s response to banning hate speech, speech codes in universities, law cases Doe v. University of Michigan and Sigma Chi Fraternity v George Mason University, and the view points of law professor Greg Margarian, proves why we should protect hate speech, even though it may seem wrong.

All around the country, colleges and universities are increasingly punishing or censoring students who engage in offensive speech. Concerns indicate that a failure to act will lead to liability under federal anti-discrimination law. In many instances, the possibility of liability is weak or non-existent. “Except in the most extreme circumstances, schools are not required to expel students for their speech in order to avoid liability.” Instead, schools are punishing students for their demonstrations of free speech if it opposes the “safe space” and inclusive environment that colleges and Universities have been trying to promote. (Papandrea)

As some colleges are consider placing speech codes and regulations on campus because of allegations concerning racist speech and harassment. There are some, such as, Cinnamon Stillwell and Charles R. Lawrence III, who 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 opposes the codes and regulations because they insist that no matter how profane the speech, it is still protected under The First Amendment. Although there are legitimate concerns for implementing speech codes, these codes should not be placed on their student’s speech because they not only violate The First Amendment, but also promote the administrative abuse of power, along with causing students to self-censor their speech, while teaching them to hide and or suppress their unpopular beliefs.

The United States is quite a diverse country, people coming from or born into different ethnic groups. Over the years, Americans used their freedom of speech to bring positive changes within society. However there has also been harsh criticism and disapproval that has caused protest with extreme actions. Knowing the history of America concerning minorities rights, there are most movements that were seen as hate speech. Most freedom of speech is protected including hate speech. Yet it has caused harm mentally and physically to the targets including causing violent actions.What is considered hate speech is speech that attacks a single person or group based on their race, ethnic origin, disability, sexual identity, or gender. While hate speech does bring psychological harm to its targets and to tolerate is not enough, putting restrictions towards hate speech could cause more problems within college campus and a social uproar.

One of the most notable rights stated in our constitution is the right to free speech. That right is engrained in the minds of every American since the creation of America itself, but currently the right to free speech is being tossed aside in the fear of conflict with opposing ideas or offensive content. College universities specifically have taken steps to impede upon this right through speech codes and other acts that restrict the right to speak freely. American’s growing infringement upon the right of free speech in universities is creating a threat to American culture and the principles that it was founded upon; In order for our citizens to withhold their individuality, opinions, and culture free speech must be actively protected.

Imagine being arrested for calling someone a mean name. The first amendment to the United States Constitution grants freedom of expression. Such liberties distinguish the United States from other nations who lack liberties for their people. However, plenty of people claim freedom of speech is abused by people to harass minorities with hate speech. Hate speech is a verbal attack on a person or group due to their ethnic background, race, gender, sexuality, religion or disability. Numerous people demand a ban on hate speech from college campuses. However, in elementary, middle and high school, we were taught to not ridicule other religions, races or sexualities. In college, we are all adults and should be able to carry ourselves accordingly. The campuses should not kick students out because they have different beliefs that are offensive. Even though it is not morally correct to offend or be disrespectful to a person by stripping them of their dignity, it is not illegal. Taking away a person’s voice strips his or her right to express themselves because they are forced to remain silent. Just

The founding fathers made free speech the First Amendment not to protect popular speech, but for the protection of unpopular speech that goes against the views of the majority. In the United States, colleges are a form of higher education beyond high school where students go further themselves for their future careers. While at college, students engage in debates that will either reaffirm or make them rethink their own beliefs, in turn making students active and engaged US citizens. However, recently an emergence of calls for the regulation of speech have gained popularity across US campuses. These people seek to regulate speech to keep students from taking offense from speech in order to promote an inclusive and diverse college environment. Colleges have a responsibility to maintain a welcoming environment for all students on campus regardless of their race or religion. However, questions to how

Censoring is not only in college classrooms, but in high school classrooms as well. It impedes on a student’s ability to develop and learn, hinders their ability to prepare for the modern-day world. Although cliché, and very sadly so, it is very apparent that today there is almost nothing that can be said that offends nobody. Thick skins have been replaced with fragile minds, and college students do not even know the extent of the first amendment. However, these same students believe they have the right to interpret the amendment their own way, and some believe they have the right to become the judiciary system if the speech doesn’t appeal to them.

Throughout the 20th Century, American colleges and universities gained the reputation of being bastions of free speech and the discussion of ideas. While universities in Europe became less and less free, cowering to political correctness, American universities fiercely debated every major issue that faced the country. Most importantly though, liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, Atheists and Christians, all believed in the spread of ideas, and free expression. However, while our institutions of higher learning remain significantly freer than their European counterparts, that reputation of freedom of speech is in doubt. Students and faculty are increasingly resentful towards anyone they deem to be perpetuating hate speech, a term that has spun wildly out of control. The Framers of the Constitution certainly never wished that their great experiment of a nation would succumb to the suppression of those with unpopular ideas, especially at the places in which children are expected to become adults, and explore new, and often provocative ideas. (I wonder) Whether it 's the 40% of millennials who believe "hate speech" should be banned by the government, the screaming at and uninviting speakers with conservative beliefs, or the fear of speaking out,, the First Amendment is under attack in 2016, but is not yet lost. This generation will have to choose whether or not they want an Orwellian government that dictates what is and isn 't an acceptable belief. The First

College campuses are supposed to be bastions of free speech and one of the first places one truly experiences a wide range of opinions and beliefs different from their own. Sadly, college campuses have become a place in which unpopular speech has been completely shut down. In this case, the dominating ideology on college campuses is liberalism. Those delivering unpopular speech are no longer invited to give their opinions in an open dialogue, rather they are intimidated into keeping their opinions quiet. The most famous case of this free-speech shut down is happening right now at the University of California, Berkeley. On February 1st, 2017, famed alt-righter Milo Yiannopoulus was scheduled to make a speech at the school. As a result, hundreds

Freedom of speech in schools can leave lasting impacts on students’ by helping them grow into mature, young adults. “Colin Kaepernick said, ‘I’m not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color’ … Brandon Marshall, who also has knelt during the national anthem, said, ‘the message is ‘I’m against social injustice’”(Refusing to Stand...). Taking pride in rights is a respectful way to protest and to show maturity. In colleges, many may be following in the footsteps of Colin Kaepernick while others are growing into adults by coming across hate symbols. Liyanga de Silva’s article “banning hate symbols” shows that some schools such as UMD may give students’ the illusion that people who are bigoted do not exist. “A university can not and should not violate students’ rights to free expression, and, as unlikely as it seems, having experiences with hateful people can be important” (Silva). Having experiences can help when students’ are growing into adults because it gives them things to go off of when trying to solve a problem as an adult. Freedom of speech is a way to help students’ face adulthood. Lasting impacts such as getting hurt by hateful people can help while students’ are growing into adults. In adulthood students’ may use past experiences to help themselves.

Whether students and teachers are able to participate in free speech across campus or strictly in certain designated zones on campus has been a debatable issue. Although some people feel free speech cannot be restricted to specific zones, others view free speech zones as helpful in controlling the speech of students. Free speech across campus is incredibly difficult to monitor because of the enormous sizes of current day campuses and the immense amount of different views. In the past, there have been situations relating to violent protesting and negative speech across campuses. Because of this, campuses have begun enforcing free speech zones in which students and faculty may verbally express their beliefs. Colleges and universities are places of higher education and learning. Part of this learning comes from listening and understanding opposite views from your own. Positively, these zones have allowed students to avoid ideas they may not want to hear; however, avoidance is not the way around life. Negatively, people believe these zones have restricted education outside of school for college students. The argument on free speech zones is important to all students, faculty, and those not at all involved in this topic at all because of the dispute for First Amendment rights.