Uni­ver­si­ties must un­equiv­o­cally pro­tect free speech

The Denver Post - - PERSPECTIVE -

Re: “What is the role of uni­ver­si­ties on is­sue of free speech?” June 25 Ved Nanda col­umn.

I read through Pro­fes­sor Ved Nanda’s ar­ti­cle search­ing for a de­fense of the First Amend­ment, but what I found was a ra­tio­nal­iza­tion for lim­it­ing free speech to those that have been anointed cor­rect in their be­liefs. Those who are in­cor­rect be­cause they of­fend the first group are to be de­nied ac­cess to uni­ver­si­ties be­cause their speech might at­tack some­one’s “hu­man­ity.”

On the same day I read this ar­ti­cle, I read about protesters in Portland, Ore., at­tack­ing po­lice with ob­jects that in­cluded urine­and fe­ces-filled bal­loons, bal­loons with un­known chem­i­cals, mar­bles, bricks and rocks. From my per­spec­tive, the threats or in­cite­ment to vi­o­lence are com­ing from the protesters. I have seen no ev­i­dence of con­ser­va­tive speak­ers in­cit­ing vi­o­lence.

If a per­son with op­pos­ing views can­not speak on a univer­sity cam­pus for fear of phys­i­cal at­tacks, then the prob­lem is not the speaker but the protesters. The role of the univer­sity is to un­equiv­o­cally pro­tect free speech on their cam­pus. Wil­liam R. Stone­ham, Cen­ten­nial

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.