|
Editorial ColumnsCommon Sense and the First Amendment(Appeared in the Harrisburg Patriot News in February 2002)
Graham Spanier
University presidents are often called upon to defend freedom of speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the constitution. We customarily do so without hesitation and with conviction, even while knowing that we are sometimes being tested by students and faculty who are determined to explore the boundaries of first amendment policy and law. Being able to speak without restriction about politics, our society, and the arts is one of the defining characteristics of our American heritage and is central to university life.February 20, 2002 But something is missing in the exercise of free speech by some members of our community -- common sense. Some lack sensitivity toward others. Others engage in speech that is offensive, even if legal. Still others don't really care about community standards, however vaguely defined they might be. I have seen educated citizens and even elected officials sworn to uphold the constitution actually denounce the first amendment when it is used to protect speech they find offensive. While I find this troubling, I understand the root of such thinking. It comes from seeing examples of free speech that seemingly cross a line. Across that line one finds traits such as rebelliousness, rejection of authority, or youthful immaturity. The victim in a tug of war between what is legally permissible and what is culturally acceptable is often the serious exploration of topics that have substantial importance to us all. There are legitimate topics of discussion that beg for greater awareness and educational programming but are at risk of public condemnation and ridicule if they are trivialized by sideshows that are intentionally provocative beyond the sensitivities of many in the community. When important issues such as reproductive health, sexually transmitted diseases, and sexual assault are trivialized, certain publics are alienated rather than enlightened, and in the end First Amendment rights are debased. University educators are intimately familiar with this dilemma. At Penn State we have seen our share of events in recent years in which students were determined to push the limits under the rubric of free speech. Such students can be charitably described as clueless about the cost to the University, or less charitably described as gleeful that some alumni, donors, and citizens have been terribly upset by the students' actions. It is curious that such students express so little concern about how their actions hinder their own causes, and it is disturbing that some students even seem to welcome the ridicule and loss of goodwill and philanthropic support brought to the University by their actions. Granted, students are here to learn, and learning sometimes involves doing things that more mature eyes might see as naive or foolhardy. But when some students act out of rebelliousness, immaturity, or out of a desire to shock in order to bring attention to their cause by using the vehicle of free speech, regardless of the cost those activities bring to the reputation of the University, it behooves responsible members of the university community to tell them that what they are doing is not to their glory, and is merely making them -- and their university -- look foolish. Often we are afraid to make such statements lest we seem intolerant, condescending, or reactionary. But this isn't just an issue of legality. We will always defend and protect the civil liberties of our students and others in the community. There is nothing that is more definitively American. But I don't think it is wrong at the same time to ask members of the University community to consider whether needlessly pushing the boundaries of their free expression right is always necessary to make a point, or to win converts to a cause. I don't think it is wrong to ask every member of the community to consider the consequences of his or her actions. |
