The advertisements you see on this thread or anywhere on CC have nothing to do with the thread and everything to do with YOU and your internet history. You are probably seeing a Duke ad because, I will bet, you have visited Duke’s website “recently.” I am not seeing a Duke ad, but ads for Mazda cars…
@colfac92 The poster in #38 was talking about the picture used in the “Featured Discussions” section on the main page at http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/. It’s the one that rotates through several threads and has a picture for each one, that is not a paid advertisement but rather something used by CC to attract you to click on the thread.
I would have thought that colleges like Oral Roberts would be the worst for free speech.
@Much2learn Scroll back up to post #18. Basically, ORU does deny free speech rights but also is a private university that makes no pretense about the fact that it subordinates free speech to other values. So if people make an informed choice to go to ORU, then that’s their choice. ORU Code of Honor says, among other things: “I PLEDGE at all times to keep my total being under subjection from all immoral and illegal actions and communications, whether on or off campus.” https://web.oru.edu/gradapps/education/code-of-honor-pledge.pdf. Pretty clear that ORU does not pretend that it supports free speech rights! And if that’s not enough, the Student Handbook says:
http://www.oru.edu/pdfs/student-handbook/oru-student-handbook.pdf (p. 27)
Thanks @Corinthian (I never go there, so I thought the reference was to the banner and sidebar ads, sorry)
My conclusion is that if you’re a strong advocate of free speech, you’re always going to be disappointed by supposed free-speech organizations, especially if they have a partisan bent, as FIRE and the ACLU obviously both do. They’re all going to want to protect some kinds of speech more than other kinds of speech.
I disagree 100%. Both FIRE and the ACLU are, in the main, 1st amendment absolutists (and yes, I am aware that the ACLU sometimes struggles with the balance between perceived religious freedom and free speech). People dislike the ACLU because they are a bunch of smelly hippies. Others dislike FIRE because they are dark and mysterious conservatives. But they both do what they do, and they are both pretty intellectually consistent. That is why ideologues attack funding sources and motivation, because they can’t argue the substance without looking silly.
And come on @Hunt. You are a lawyer and understand the difference between free association under defined strictures (like at BYU for example) and general chilling of speech. To say not objecting to BYU or Oral Roberts Univ. having a conduct code is inconsistent with objecting to barring pro Trump signs is just wrong.
I was referring specifically to Harvard’s restrictions on finals clubs–which got them on FIRE’s list, even though it is ostensibly a list about free speech, not free association. To me, to do that while (lamely, in my opinion) giving a bunch of more restrictive colleges a pass, is a defect in FIRE’s outlook.
Of course, it’s always difficult when you apply civil rights issues to private institutions.
I’m sure FIRE highlights Harvard because Harvard is so highly respected and so high profile, and other academic institutions will be watching to see what Harvard does and maybe following its lead. Oral Roberts University not so much. Also FIRE’s speech code database says:
https://www.thefire.org/spotlight/. I agree with @Ohiodad51 that both the ACLU and FIRE are pretty much first amendment absolutists and intellectually consistent.
Bryn Mawr should definitely be on the list. I decided to permanently leave the college this year because of the culture there. I know people that have failed papers because they took economically conservative stances rather than complying to the liberal doctrine taught at the schools. This past school year, there was also a girl bullied into leaving the college for being a republican and supporting Trump’s candidacy because of her political affiliation. The lack of free speech and diversity of thought on college campuses is extremely concerning. How can our generation progress if the most educated of us can’t even bear to tolerate opinions that differ from theirs?
suprised UCB isn’t on this list - or UCD
the two schools I want to go to but feel disgusted at for recent events.
Just a reminder that we have to be mindful of the Moderator’s admonition in post #8 that this not become a thread about a specific controversial speaker.
Regarding violent protests, FIRE issued a statement that read in part:
https://www.thefire.org/updated-statement-on-violent-protest-at-university-of-california-berkeley/. FIRE has been basically supportive of the way Berkeley Chancellor Dirks has responded to protests. https://www.thefire.org/in-maryland-and-california-university-leaders-set-example-with-commitments-to-free-speech/
I wonder to what extent the current uproar will filter into declining applications for admissions. I just read about a protest of a speaker at middlebury college. The faculty member who was ushering the speaker was injured by the crowd. I have just crossed Middlebury off the list of schols that I will suggest to my children.
I am so glad both of the kiddles have - or are - going to relatively apolitical campuses. Then again, one’s in engineering, and getting out in 4 years with honors. Simply no time to agonize over the drama of the day.
@marvin100, I am not sure of the spirit of your query, but I am pretty sure that the statement from FIRE supporting the actions taken by the chancellor occurred after the videos with Milo surfaced. Not sure why those events are linked for you though.
Please see Moderator post #8. We can certainly discuss ways for campuses to respond to controversial speakers but we have been admonished not to make this about that one controversial speaker.
Nowadays if it doesn’t agree with your opinion, it is automatically offensive.
I’ve had people come to campus and stand at the free-speech area basically hollering that we were all going to hell because we weren’t like him. He said a lot of ignorant things about g ay people and sui cide. Even with all that, it is free speech and since it was in the designated area, it should be respected. I 100% disagree with what he said but he was not doing any harm to anyone.
Uh, ACLU here. I will defend the KKK’s right to free speech provided the speech isn’t a call to incite violence. Content is fully protected; conduct is restricted. As we like to say, it’s where, when, and how you say it that determines whether or not you should be limited. But what you say should be 100% protected. Period. This was reiterated to all ACLU volunteers across the nation today on a livestream. This is not mutually exclusive with fighting Trump policies that we find unconstitutional.
And I should add that I was disturbed by the incidents that took place at Berkeley and Middlebury to shut down controversial speakers. College is a time to listen to points of view you disagree with - even hate - so you can learn to think critically and argue logically. And if you don’t have the stomach to sit through something like that, protest but don’t disrupt and don’t obstruct. It’s immature. I am hoping that the ones responsible for the violence in each case were not students.