more comments...
« anh8705 wrote on Wednesday, Nov 13 at 12:48 PM »
Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire - please read it if you do not believe that "Hate Speech" is not protected. To those of you who think it is, perhaps you believe that Snyder v. Phelps, the case against Westboro Baptist, protects such words. It does not. Please go educate yourselves before you start spouting off your "rights" and how you believe they allow you to say "whatever" you want. Furthermore, let's take a look, very specifically, at types of speech the First Amendment does NOT protect: • Obscenity — Speech/materials may be deemed obscene (and therefore unprotected) if the speech meets the following (extremely high) threshold: It (1) appeals to the "prurient" interest in sex, (2) is patently offensive by community standards, and (3) lacks literary, scientific, or artistic value. • Incitement — Activity or speech that advocates for producing 'imminent lawless action' and is likely to produce such action. • Fighting words — Words that are defined "by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace" or have a "direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the person to whom, individually, the remark is addressed" (Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 62 S. Ct. 766, 86 L. Ed. 1031[1942]). • Defamation — An intentional and false statement about an individual that is publicly communicated in written (called "libel") or spoken (called "slander") form, causing injury to the individual. • Perjury — A knowingly false statement given under oath in court. • Extortion — Obtaining property by wrongful use of force or fear. • Harassment — A severe and pervasive course of conduct directed at an individual causing that person substantial emotional distress. • True threat — A communicated intent to inflict death or great bodily harm to a person with an apparent ability to carry out the threat. • False advertising — A knowingly untruthful or misleading statement about a product or service. • Certain symbolic actions, if the actions are otherwise illegal. o Examples: Tagging/graffiti, littering, burning a cross on private property. • Plagiarism of copyrighted material • Child pornography Let’s not forget about Alabama’s harassment legislation, which, by the way, is a Class C misdemeanor. Alabama defines one form of harassment as "Directs abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture towards another person”. Back to the point, which has very little to do with the First Amendment. I only felt the need to outline some points for those of you who continue to cite it as grounds to have the resolution dismissed. There are students who do not feel safe for very valid reasons (did none of you read what happened to Emily? ) Something must be done – and no one else has stepped up to the plate with a tangible solution. So stop with the slippery slopes of “oh no I won’t be able to cuss out my team’s rival”, etc. (Boo freaking hoo, by the way.Stop whining about it and propose a reasonable solution if you don’t like this one.
« allauburnallin wrote on Wednesday, Nov 13 at 10:01 AM »
Freedom of speech and the Bill of Rights pertains to government action. Upon enrollment to AU, students agree to comply with the pertinent policies, regulations, and restrictions Auburn University imposes on its students. We're required to pay tuition, buy a meal plan, not park in Pres. Gogue's parking spot, refrain from threatening our teachers, and not plagiarize. Likewise, we agree to treat students in accordance with the Anti-Harassment Policy. I can state unequivocally that as a student, I cannot utter discriminatory words towards members of the protected classes designated by the Anti-Harassment Policy. To do so is to be in violation of the Anti-Harassment Policy, which can lead to certain negative consequences from the University. The policy states, in part, Any form of discrimination or harassment related to a student’s race, color, sex (which includes sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression), religion, national origin, age or disability (protected classes) is a violation of University policy. This policy is intended to cover any prohibited harassment of or discrimination against a student by other students, employees, or University agents. This policy also covers harassment of students by non-employees on University property or while engaged in University sponsored activities, as well as prohibited discrimination against students by University contractors. Student-on-student complaints of sexual harassment or sexual misconduct, up to and including sexual assault, will be handled according to the University’s Title IX Policy and Procedures for Student Sex Discrimination.