Free speech is a guarantee that tops the Bill of Rights. Although the rights are not hierarchal, the placement is symbolically significant.
The First Amendment unfortunately was tortured in the early years of our Republic, but as generations passed the Supreme Court has clarified the limits of free speech. Over time this right has become almost immutable, barring examples such as child pornography and dangerous speech. Despite the fact most people love their own free speech, many get mad and would like to see others’ free speech stifled when they disagree.
Calls from students have asked that preachers from Soulwinners Ministries International be banned from our campus’ Free Speech Zone. They seem to wonder why a group that has no ties to UH is allowed to come here to call us heathens and sinners. Truthfully, the reason is simple: you have a right to ignore idiots. Why is it that even calling us names is permitted? It serves a purpose.
Keeping extreme views out of the public forum stifles them. There are many views in this world that are considered very extreme, and when you stifle extremists, they use other methods to be heard. Some methods are very annoying, such as our own Students Against Sweatshops, and some are dangerous, like the Taliban. In America, it is their right to voice and demonstrate their views. The purpose is to create a marketplace of ideas with as many views as Wal-Mart has products. It is your right to know them all and to accept only what you choose.
Unfortunately, when the Soulwinners came, I remember waiting for them to leave. When they did leave, there were Muslims talking to Christians, Hare Krishnas speaking to athletes and one person whom I can’t place at all who was talking to anyone who would listen. The net effect was that no one got hurt, and the extreme use of free speech brought the masses together.
Lowly tactics used by Students Against Sweatshops are much the same as the Soulwinners.
As with the Soulwinners, as soon as I met them I was anxious to end the meeting. The net effect was the same.
We have a core group of highly motivated students on this campus. When SAS acts, one group talks about what they have done, and another group learns from the mistakes of SAS and applies those lessons to the approaches they take. The marketplace of ideas once again helps.
Sadly, both groups try to force precisely what they see as the right thing, while failing to account for the fact that they do not know everything. Both groups believe in condemning any person who fails to share the same extreme views. Both groups have noble goals, but when ignoble people take up those aims, they fail.
Let them speak. Let them protest. Let them petition. The Soulwinners do not win souls and the SAS does not get its goals accomplished. They are both failures, although their shortcomings often act as a cautionary tale for more productive people when it comes to deciding on tactics.
Khan, a political science and history junior, can be reached via [email protected]
