Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on freedom of speech in colleges
Freedom of speech in colleges
Essay on freedom of speech in colleges
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on freedom of speech in colleges
Freedom of speech in colleges
Essay on freedom of speech in colleges
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Author and First Amendment Lawyer Greg Lukianoff, in his book, Unlearning Liberty: Campus Censorship The End of American Debate, explores deeply into some of the most compelling college and university controversies in which freedom of speech, a right every person in the United States has, is taken away. The author mentions the way students, through debate, become less aware on what their rights are in terms of defending themselves from harsh administrative rule. Author Lukianoff explicitly states his point that what is currently happening to students in modern educational institutions is affecting and will affect them badly later down the road. The author made several arguments that completely made me agree with him.
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.
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.
In Derek Bok’s, Protecting Freedom of Expression On The Campus, he brings light to the issue of censorship in universities. He states that students at Harvard University got offended after a few students displayed the confederate flag. There have been many cases in which people have tried to censor offensive material however; the Supreme Court preferred to conserve the freedom of expression. He believes that if censorship starts to take place, it will be difficult to know when to cross the line. In addition, it will not fix the initial problem since the offenders will continue to abuse others using different means.
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
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.
While contrasting opinions should be allowed, there has to be a line that can determine the differences between expressing opinions or influencing negative thoughts on others. However, once the specifications have been put on the expression of ideas, a citizen should still be able to find their freedom of speech as “the most cherished founding principle of the nation’s identity” (Gaudefroy 1). Rules should not restrict a group's efforts to defy unjustifiable laws. Our freedom of speech has to continue to be an important resource that is available to all citizens. Failure to comply with the citizen’s ideas would create
This case clashes with freedom of speech, but it is also about freedom to
Political conservatives in America vastly hold true the original traditions and freedoms in America and rarely compromise with change. One such prominent conservative, John W. Whitehead, in his essay, “The Schools Are Destroying Freedom of Speech,” argues that the modern day public educational system has inflicted unconstitutional restrictions of freedom on its students. Throughout his essay, Whitehead attempts to build his credibility by utilizing the Bill of Rights and different examples to appeal to the ethos, logos, and pathos aspects of his audience – the American citizens; however, Whitehead’s apparent bias, shown through his strong conservative values and passionate tone, causes him to disregard the deeper meaning of the educational
If someone is going to have a conversation with another person, than their freedom of speech should be protected, however; if someone had the sole intentions of causing harm or discomfort to the person that they were speaking with or at, then their freedom of speech may not be so protected. This should be of no concern to any persons on a college campus who are worrying about their right to freedom of speech or expression being neglected, considering that speech codes only work to prevent harm inflicted by hate speech to all students. I agree with Lawrence in that if we are going to end racism, we, as a society, have to take small steps in protecting minority
In January 1942, the West Virginia Board of Education adopted a resolution to enforce every student and teacher to a pledge of allegiances of the nation’s flag. If anyone refused to honor the flag he or she would be found “insubordinate” and expelled from school. The Barnett sisters were Jehovah’s Witnesses who refused to pledge of allegiances while in public school. Their father would not allow them to salute the flag.
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.
Howard Zinn famously once said: “The First Amendment is whatever the cop on the beat says it is.” Zinn’s words may have best been exemplified in Ferguson, Missouri, in the aftermath of the Michael Brown shooting. The First Amendment states that no law shall be made “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble” (U.S. Constitution). Yet in Ferguson, protesters were confronted by police officers carrying military-grade equipment, and reporters were arrested while simply doing their job. Zinn appears to have been right; at least temporarily, the rights an American has under the First Amendment are whatever the cop on the beat says they are.
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
The term “safe space”, a supposed haven where students of minority and marginalization can feel free to express their ideas and be themselves has started a movement across college campuses nationwide. The newfangled movement is driven largely by students who wish to scrub campuses clean of offensive or discomforting topics. Safe spaces emerged during the post-Civil Rights era where women, LGBTQ, and racial minorities grew in presence on campuses; however, today they serve as refuges for like-minded people who don’t feel the need to explain or defend their personal beliefs. Recently, the safe space debate has taken a controversial turn: arguments and cases have been created over whether safe spaces provide a supportive environment or cultivate