Is one person’s free speech freer than another’s? That is the ethical dilemma posed in the Admiral Davy Jones Case. As a board member of Bradtown University, I will seek to use the framework for ethical decision making while adhering to The Responsibility Principle, as defined by Freeman’s excerpt Managing for Stakeholders (Freeman, 2007): “Most people, most of the time, want to, actually do, and should accept responsibility for the effects of their actions on others” (p. 61).
The ethical issues presented by this situation are primarily related to free speech. Does anyone have more of a free speech right than another? It appears sides have been taken by specific groups, but any decision will affect the entire university. The …show more content…
Other outside groups representing gun rights and nuclear nonproliferation hope to use this event as a platform for their causes. The entire university, including its leadership, but also the broader community will be impacted by virtue of the institutional reputation going forward based, in part, on how this event is handled.
There are several options available to the board. Cancelling the appearance is a decision that would not address any of the ethical conflicts identified and would probably become a public relations nightmare. The opposite option would be to take no action on behalf of the university and see how the event plays out. This would not likely encourage discourse, however, as the loudest voice would likely dominate. The speaker could be allowed on campus, but all protests could be forbidden, striking a perception of bias regardless of whether that was the intent. Likewise, restricting the work of the press would also inflame and perhaps magnify the disagreements they feel a duty to share. It is here where I would consider how “Managing for stakeholders suggests that executive try to reframe the questions” (Freeman, p. 64). Is there an alternative that creates an opportunity for campus and community wide discussion about foreign policy?
Based on the fact pattern and decision making steps thus far, I would proceed as follows:
Admiral Davy Jones would be permitted to speak in the auditorium. I would direct
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
This year’s election alone has brought about many emotions and deep rooted feelings that have not come out in years. Hate speech and actions carried out because of hate speech has cause a deep division in American culture. Groups like “Black Lives Matter”, “All Lives Matter”, and “Alt-Right” are all under fire for things that have been said or done in the names of these groups. There has been terrorist attacks in the names of religious groups whom believe that a newspaper or group has insulted their religion, beliefs, and gods. Not to mention our own President Elect of the United States, Donald Trump, has been accused of fueling much of the hate speech we see today. This begs the question, should freedom of speech have any restrictions or be limited in any way, or is that unconstitutional? To look at this we must first identify what “Freedom of Speech” is as defined in the constitution and how it relates to current issues in the world and in America, then I will talk about some situations where regulation is already put in place in America, lastly we will look at some situations where I believe freedom of speech could use some clarification or restriction.
Despite their opinions, free speech was a great way in this situation for students to rally together and publically inform the rest of campus of their beliefs. In the school newspaper, The Daily Emerald, CJ Ciaramelle wrote “About 300 students from across the campus community — student unions, Greek Life, the ASUO, the Survival Center, the Women’s Center — showed up at the meeting to protest the Forum” (1). Although the majority of people protested against the forum the right to free speech, it is important because it allows students to make decisions on their own and invite students to do the same.
The University decide who can write what where does negatively impact the first amendment right of students. However, I also believe that the way they showed their support for Trump can be found as offensive to some. In this case, more political correctness may have limited the negative light shined on this situation.
“Free Inquiry? Not on Campus” by John Leo is an important essay that shows exactly how important it is to protect people's political views and opinions. In Leo's essay, he elaborates how times have changed and how we live in more of a liberal left-wing society and because of this everyone has to be more politically correct. Leo talks about the social change universities and colleges on how they used to promote free speech, but now are more like the speech police telling us what's opinions you should have on any given subject and any other opinion is considered wrong. Leo gives an example of this and writes “in October 2007, for instance, a student mob stormed a Columbia University stage, shutting down speeches by two members of the Minutemen, an anti-illegal immigration group.The students shouted they have no right to
The right to freedom of expression of ones religion is at stake in this case. Mrs. Williams has a right to express her religion freely. However, based upon the Establishment Clause which prohibits any law “respecting the establishment of religion”, she does not have the right to force others to conform to her way of thinking. At the same time, students and community members have a right to express their religion, too. They also have a right not to have another person’s religion forced on them. So there is only one individual right at stake here, but it is not possible to respect this right of behalf of all the claimants. While the majority of the community, the school board, and some students will feel that it is Mrs. Williams’ right to keep the bulletin board posted, some community members, students, and ACLU feel it is their right not to keep it posted.
All schools should ensure that we protect the speech rights of their staff members. In this course, previously we learned how complicated speech rights can be, especially in this day of age, when more people are using social media to express their concerns. As educators, we need to know when we are protected and we also need to be careful as we express our concerns about our school’s or district policies. Usually our staff handbook has guidelines and procedures as to how we should communicate with news media outlets.
Constitutional issues in this case are the student is not given his First Amendment rights and also the Due Process a Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The right to freedom of speech and due process are both laws that anyone should be following and anyone making a decision toward a case needs to consider these because they are apart of the amendments and rights to the people. However, in this case they ruled that Bethel High School was not wrong and didn't take away his
Brian and Gloria are students at Roger Williams University who share different views on a touchy subject. Brian, a freshman, reached out to Gloria, a senior and chair of CEN, wishing to invite Milo Yiannopoulos to speak at our campus. After doing research on Yiannopoulos, Gloria believes he is “racist and sexist” and goes against everything Roger Williams University stands for. Gloria feels Yiannopoulos would offend many students on campus, possibly leading to violence. She thinks Roger Williams would not allow Yiannopoulos to speak at our campus, so we shouldn’t allow him to either. However, Brian believes Roger Williams University is an “inclusive” campus and we welcome and value all expressions of diversity and identity. Brian says Roger Williams was probably the first American to “challenge societal norms”, and we should follow in his footsteps. Brian feels Gloria is being narrow-minded and he is being denied his right to free speech and peaceful assembly.
To address the first question, Keller had created a political group, Friends of Liberty, in which the group would stage “ask-ins” at open meetings for other campus organizations. First, we must address the aspect of an open meeting; these campus organizations were providing all students with the opportunity for discussion in a public forum. Public for a are the most important avenue for employing the right to unabridged speech for all United State citizens. “‘to preserve an uninhibited marketplace of ideas in which truth will ultimately prevail,’ this aspect of traditional public for a is a virtue, not a vice.” McCullen v. Coakley (2014). This court has held that public for a are to not be regulated by the government, except in an extremely limited fashion, time-place-manner. There were no regulations for time, place, or manner by the university. Keller was fully within his rights, as a student of the university, to attend the
An online petition signed by 2,000 observed that UCI administration did little to protect the students from the hateful comments and death threats directed toward them on our school’s official Facebook page. Instead of protecting and supporting vulnerable students, the school administration issued a statement denouncing the six students that supported the resolution. They asserted that the ban was somehow the work of a fringe group of students, not part of a student-elected body of government with the power to set such policies in place. The school chancellor, Howard Gillman, added fire to the flame, claiming that “it was outrageous and indefensible that they would question the appropriateness of displaying the American flag on this great campus”. Instead of supporting the students’ exercising their freedom of speech, the official campus response was criticize the students who were already being put under attack by the public at
In one case at OSU, a pro-life club called Cowboys for Life was protesting against abortion when the university interfered. The problem stated in the report that the university had was that the group was showing pictures related to abortion. Personally, I do see how they could interfere in a case like this because it has gone beyond speech. Some
Free of Speech is still dilemma to schools. For instance we look in a news article, we find a similar situation like NFL Protest.Although the situation at Harvard, a couple of students were exhibiting the Confederate flag for community view.Derek Bok, a past President at Harvard University and the author of “Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” he discusses the controversial between two groups of the sight of swastika flag at Harvard.Boks argue that exhibiting the swastika symbol distinctly descends within the protection of free speech under First Amendment.But he feel disappointed and himself that students who were involved had see what was being displayed.
Throughout history, free speech has been one of the most touchiest arguments anyone has ever known. Whether people should be allowed to speak their mind to express their individuality, or to say what they believe is morally right. But should free speech be a moral right?
Is Freedom Of Speech a true thing? You might want to think again. Over the past couple of centuries it has changed. You used to be able to say anything and everything you wanted. Now you say something and you are immediately thrown in jail. Like what happened to Bradley Manning over the past year and a half. He released documents about military killing innocent people and what does our government do? They threw him in jail. The military did not comment on the situation because they knew it was true. He wanted people knowing what they did was wrong and he got in trouble for it. I do not see that they should have thrown him in jail. What my concern is do we actually have Freedom Of Speech? Are we allowed
But, John Delaney, the university’s president said his suspension has been lifted. Instead, the school made Parker continue his classes somewhere else because “substantial disruptions have been caused to date and there is a reasonable expectation that those disruptions to the learning and living environment would continue and may possibly escalate if he is allowed on campus” Delaney addressed and for Parker’s, the staff, and the faculty’s safety. That is how they have escaped a lawsuit. In fact, he has to go back for another meeting with the disciplinary panel with a police officer escorting him. This event causes a delicate situation for school authorities in America since it deals with freedom of speech and expression, at the same securing the community of hate. Universities do not want to be considered a part of white nationalism, especially now with the “Unite the Right” rally in the University of Virginia. Despite that, Universities are required “to permit it in accordance with the law, as well as pick up the expense of policing it” (Vice News). The University of Florida’s Marion B. Brechner First Amendment Project director, Clay Calvert said “public universities are in a tough place here, we’re pitting the First Amendment rights of individuals against real-world safety concerns of students and faculty. If you allow [Parker] on campus, and he commits violence, the president of the