SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
With Governor Roy Cooper (D) taking no action on the bill, the state of North Carolina has enacted the Restore Campus Free Speech Act, the first comprehensive campus free-speech legislation based on the Goldwater proposal. That proposal, which I [Stanley Kurtz (Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center)] co-authored along with Jim Manley and Jonathan Butcher of Arizona's Goldwater Institute, was released on January 31 and is now under consideration in several states. It's fitting that North Carolina should be the first state to enact a Goldwater-inspired law.
[...] The North Carolina Restore Campus Free Speech Act achieves most of what the Goldwater proposal sets out to do. It ensures that University of North Carolina policy will strongly affirm the importance of free expression. It prevents administrators from disinviting speakers whom members of the campus community wish to hear from. It establishes a system of disciplinary sanctions for students and anyone else who interferes with the free-speech rights of others, and ensures that students will be informed of those sanctions at freshman orientation. It reaffirms the principle that universities, at the official institutional level, ought to remain neutral on issues of public controversy to encourage the widest possible range of opinion and dialogue within the university itself. And it authorizes a special committee created by the Board of Regents to issue a yearly report to the public, the regents, the governor, and the legislature on the administrative handling of free-speech issues.
Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/450027/north-carolina-campus-free-speech-act-goldwater-proposal
(Score: 3, Insightful) by takyon on Friday August 11 2017, @02:25PM (8 children)
Should #1 and #3 be considered illegal? How many decibels loud can the airhorns be before we start calling it "assault with an acoustic device [soylentnews.org]"?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 11 2017, @03:05PM (3 children)
Going by the "your rights end where mine begin" theory, I'd say yes.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 11 2017, @06:48PM (2 children)
Well if we're on the discussion of violent protests, maybe some more light should be shed on non-violent protests, like the one that got a line of protesters sprayed in the face with pepper spray at UC Davis a few years back.
The reason I bring this up is because if we're going to try and keep civil protestation and open discourse going on, we need to ensure both controversial speakers, their supporters, and their dissenters feel safe, as well as that law enforcement patrolling the venue is ensuring the safety of ALL participants, whether on the 'accepted' or 'reviled' side of a discussion without bias.
As soon as bias is allowed by persons who are supposed to be acting as a neutral party the whole system breaks down, much like we've let happen to the US as a whole.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 12 2017, @05:31AM (1 child)
I'm starting to think the only sane thing to do is to take a step back in time and allow people to sort out these differences with fisticuffs
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday August 13 2017, @12:23AM
They will use cars instead. [nbcnews.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by boxfetish on Saturday August 12 2017, @07:28AM (3 children)
I'd say no. #1 and #3, although annoying and childish, shouldn't actually be illegal. I suppose I would have less problem with the universities themselves having rules or codes of conduct that disallow #1 and #3. #2 and #4 should be punishable offenses both legally and academically, imo. This bill seems rather hypocritical to me. You are either in favor of all speech or you are not. If your point of view is severely in the minority on colleges campuses, to the point that unpopular guest speakers are uninvited or shouted down, then shouldn't you win the hearts and minds of those shouters/protestors with the merit of your ideas? You don't pass a bill effectively trying to force an unpopular minority opinion to be listened to. You don't legislate ideology. Only a fool would think you can.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 13 2017, @03:42AM (2 children)
How many decibels is the merit of an idea? You can't win hearts and minds, if your speakers can't be heard above the din or aren't allowed to speak on campus. And how many people, especially those with air horns, do you really need to drown out a speaker? My view is a small, really dedicated minority could drown out all invited speakers on a campus, if they so choose.
(Score: 2) by boxfetish on Sunday August 13 2017, @09:38AM (1 child)
Then the university itself should have behavioral or conduct standards to address when the line between speech and harassment is crossed. All others can fuck off trying to regulate this.
I can see both sides of this, though. I actually think that the idea someone else threw out in this thread is probably the best compromise. If a real student group wants to bring a speaker to campus, then poll the student body. If 10% respond in the affirmative, then it's on. Otherwise, not happening.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 13 2017, @12:53PM
Not if it's a public university such as UNC. As an arm of the government they have to grant the rights of the Constitution, particular that of freedom of speech. So they can't have behavioral/conduct standards that can be used to deliberately exclude particular topics of speech by the decision makers.
Who gets to decide when this poll is triggered? And why should the student body get a say any more than anyone else? My view is that along those lines is that informal, small venues can be reserved by one signature (or even just occupied on the spot, if the venue happens to be empty) while more formal venues might require signatures proportional to the capacity of the venue, like a tenth. So a group can move into a small classroom after hours without having to consult with anyone. But it might take 3 signatures to reserve a small meeting room or 5,000 signatures to reserve the stadium. Further, if there are costs to the university associated with large speeches or conferences, that should be covered as well.