Stuart Taylor is a senior writer and contributing editor at Newsweek. He has co-authored a book on political correctness, has written for American Lawyer Media, lectured at Princeton, served as a reporter for various newspapers, and practiced law in D.C. He graduated from Princeton University and Harvard Law School.
Taylor claims that United States citizens’ First Amendment rights are being violated in campuses across the county by political correctness, the bias of the media, and universities’ speech codes. Taylor gives several examples of both republican and conservative public speakers who have been challenged by heckler's veto. In some cases, this went so far as the issuing of violent threats by the opposition. His three primary examples are varied, including speakers of both genders, and covering issues such as racism and feminism. Ward Connerly, an African American bussinessman, is a former University of California Regent with a strong libertarian philospohy (Ward). Linda Chavez is a Fox News Analyst who also served as the highest ranking woman in President Regan's Administration (Linda). Christina Hoff Sommers holds a PhD. In philosophy, and is known for her work authoring books that challenge the ethics of modern feminism. All three of the people cited have been heckled and abused numerous times while engaged in speaking and campaigning.
According to Taylor, "None of these efforts to silence Connerly, Chavez, and Sommers by heckler’s veto has ever been reported in any national newspaper" (Taylor 212). There are a few exceptions appearing in the Washington Times and handful of opinion articles in various newspapers. The media fails to recognize and report on the importance of these republican and conservative voices being repeatedly drowned on in liberal campuses.
Thor Halvorssen, founder of Foundation for Individual Rights in Education Inc. (FIRE), is an advocate of free speech for all – regardless of political affiliation, race, or sex. In a report released in 2007, FIRE found that "75 percent of schools surveyed maintain policies that clearly restrict speech that—outside the borders of campus—is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution" (Report). Taylor, through Halvorssen, demonstrates that speech codes often have double standards biased against conservatives or Christians. Speech Codes are policies established on campuses that place restrictions on the students regarding the use of racist, sexist, etc. comments. While sometimes general, these codes can also be very specific. Halvorssen goes on to equate campus administrator's discipline of students to that of "military tribunals" (Taylor 213).
A valid concern against this total freedom of speech is the issue that "hate speech" can quite easily turn to "hate crimes" that could have been avoided had speech codes been in place to prevent the free use of hate speech in the first place. So is it better to restrict some phrases or insinuations in the hope that these crime will never occur? While one never knows how far a government will go, being cautious of restrictions on free speech is a wise idea. Most communist and fascist nations controlled the country and kept their power through the limitations on the voice of the common person. But let us assume for a moment that a federally instituted speech code was in effect. Would this stop a person who was boiling with anger from committing a hate crime against another person? In some cases it may very well expose the person before he commits a crime. But the chance of it significantly lowering the rate of hate crimes seems highly improbable.
It has long been debated what, if any, measures are appropriately taken against a citizen of the United States for exercising his First Amendment rights. Challenges arise as college administrators face the issue of denying freedom of speech not to a student, but a citizen. The full effects of these measures still remain in question. After the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, FIRE released the following statement: "Liberty of opinion, speech, and expression is indispensable to a free and, in the deepest sense, progressive society. Deny it to one, and you deny it effectively to all. These truths long have been ignored and betrayed on our campuses, to the peril of a free society" (Halvorssen).
Campuses pride themselves on diversity and tolerance of alternate views while simultaneously placing restrictions on what students are allowed to say and do. Herein lies the largest fault against the United States citizens' First Amendment right: the right to free speech. Like all freedom, there will be a limited few who abuse it, but that creates no cause for restriction of the majority who respect it. While the premise of instituting speech codes to protect students and faculty from potential offense is an admirable one, it remains without due cause.
Works Cited
Halvorssen, Thor L. "Campus Tyranny." Boundless Webzine. 2001. Boundless Webzine.
5 May 2009 http://www.boundless.org/2001/departments/campus_culture/a0000505.html.
"Report: Unlawful Speech Codes Thrive at Schools Nationwide." "FIRE Press Release"
FIRE. Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. 5 May 2009
http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/8702.html.
Taylor Jr. , Stuart, "It’s Time to Junk the Double Standard on Free Speech" The Blair
Reader: Exploring Contemporary Issues. 6th ed. Ed. Laurie G. Kirszner and Stephen R. Mandell. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2008. 23-29.
"Linda Chavez." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 4 May 2009, 20:59 UTC. 7 May
2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Linda_Chavez&oldid=287920610>.
"Ward Connerly." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 29 Apr 2009, 04:26 UTC. 7 May
2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ward_Connerly&oldid=286791464>.
"Christina Hoff Sommers." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 1 May 2009, 21:06 UTC.
7 May 2009 <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Christina_Hoff_Sommers&oldid=287324043>.
1 comment:
Mmm, nice pape!!
Post a Comment