Elimintating the Clemson Speech Code

Elimintating the Clemson Speech Code - LaKeya Jenkins...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
LaKeya Jenkins English 103 Section 11 November 12 , 2007 Respectable Remedies Do Not Cause a Plethora of Problems Although the decision to maintain or eliminate the Clemson speech policy entails many different viewpoints , it should not be a difficult choice to make. A close look at each side of the issue will demonstrate the prevalence of logical reasons to dispose of such speech regulations . After examining these issues , it stands clear that Clemson University should discontinue its enforcement of the speech codes because they are filled with grey areas and loop holes and they often limit views . Existing as such a widely controversial issue , it may be that there are people who would choose to disagree with this point of view . They may argue that hate speech should be banned on campus because it leads to violence . Charles R . Lawrence III , a law professor at the Stanford University Law School, believes that “insulting words will provoke a violent response with a resulting breach of the peace ” (159). His argument , in other words, is that although the words
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
2 themselves are not punishable under law , violent acts are. Therefore, by forbidding the insults to take place , the issue is eliminated at its core. In addition, Mari J. Matsuda , a law professor at Georgetown University, claims that “it does not require actual physical assault for assaultive speech to silence ” (153). Here, Matsuda shows that even when the hurtful words of others do not lead to violence , they still cause problems . In that case , a person not living under a speech code such as Clemson ’s may easily get away with verbal assault unpunished. Matsuda and others are willing to admit that such insults may not always lead to violence , but claim that the insults are still wounding . Although these arguments may sound legitimate , they provide no valid case for the need of a hate speech policy on the Clemson University campus . Both of the scenarios aforementioned may be handled properly without the Clemson speech code . Clearly , a physical assault would be punishable under national law. For the cases in which an insult does lead to fighting , the persons involved will be disciplined nevertheless . As for the second case in which an insult is not acted upon , there is also a correcting force already involved. If a person presents an
Background image of page 2
3 insult that seems not to have an effect on a person , will the oppressor not eventually realize he is accomplishing
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 4
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This essay was uploaded on 04/07/2008 for the course ENGL 103 taught by Professor Lusk during the Fall '06 term at Clemson.

Page1 / 9

Elimintating the Clemson Speech Code - LaKeya Jenkins...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online