Freedom of Speech vs Disrupting the Peace at University of California Irvine

This blog is a response to this article.
At University of California Irvine while the Israeli ambassador on campus was giving a speech, many Muslim students stood up, interrupted his speech, and shouted over him attacking his viewpoints. This video was taken during the speech and shows just what happened. The students were arrested, prosecuted, and convicted for "violating a law against disrupting public meetings." The students argued they were within their first amendment rights of free speech and they were convicted solely because they were Muslims. The University asked the District Attorney to drop the changes claiming the University had already punished them. The group Jewish Voice for Peace supported the Universities request to drop the charges.
I have two responses to this article. First, I do not agree with the students' arguments that they were exercising their freedom of speech and did not do anything wrong. Freedom of speech does not give you the right to say what you want when you want it. They have the right to their opinion and can express it freely without having to disrupt a public speech. What they did was not only disturbing the peace, but it clearly interfered with the learning process on campus. They can bring in their own speakers, or even get a sanctioned time in a lecture hall to express their ideas where no one would have the right to interrupt them.
My second response is that I do agree with the idea that this was a trial that should not have taken place. They violated a school rule against disrupting public meetings, and the school was right to punish them. However, the fact that they were convicted in court I do believe was somewhat bias to their religion. In court I think it was more about what they said, then the idea that they said something. What they did was wrong, but a misdemeanor might be taking it too far. At most give them a warning. If they did not learn from the schools punishment and continue to engage in this behavior, the school can expel them. Because what they did was not a serious danger to society, there's no need to take it any farther. Especially when there's the possibility of a bias jury.

Savage Inequalities: Life on the Mississippi

The nonfiction novel Savage Inequalities by Jonathan Kozol shows the horrifying truth of the inequalities within the public school systems. It follows a school in East St. Louis, Illinois named after Martin Luther King Jr. I never thought about the symbolism behind even just the name of the high school until Kozol pointed it out. In the chapter titled Life On The Mississippi Kozol.writes, "The irony of naming segregated schools for Martin Luther King." The school is also described as, "full of sewer water and the doors are locked with chains. Every student in that school its black." Then it concludes, "It's a terrible joke on history." I feel like since the civil rights movement as we learned in history is "over", people kind of forget about any race inequalities. They say "look we have a black president" and think that we're equal. In the all black town the school system is horrible. It's not the childrens' faults that they were born into this school system. Blame the parents? Think again. Kozol states, "Blacks were drawn to East St. Louis from the South by promises of jobs." If history is to blame, then who's responsibility is it to fix the problem. My answer is the government backed up by its citizens. We have to start caring about other people, and stop only thinking about what's best for us. This school needs help. It needs funds and motivated teachers. This book has opened my eyes to show me that the civil rights movement is not over until people are not only equal by law, but by education as well.

Speech Codes on Campus

Colleges should definitely be allowed to ban certain speech on campus. Maybe the literal speech, but more symbolic speech. If you don't agree then maybe after this example you'll change your mind.
"Photographs from Delta Sigma Phi's party showed fraternity members in blackface and KKK costumes. Some even went so far as to simulate the lynching of a member in blackface wearing a T-shirt bearing the name FUBU. (The FUBU line of clothing was created by African Americans and marketed "FOR US BY US.")" ("Jim Crow on Fraternity Row", Tolerance.org).
This speech was clearly not showing a political idea, rather poking fun at the African American race. One picture has a white guy with black face paint on and a rope around his neck. These actions are not only wrong because they are incredibly insensitive, but because they portray illegal hate crimes that target a specific race. These reasons are why this type of symbolic speech should be banned on campus.
DePaul University, a college I hope to attend, is one of the many colleges that have these so called speech codes. It states that the college has the right to remove any "displays that advertise commercial products/services; advocate the use of alcohol or drugs; are discriminatory; unlawfully harass by abusing, assailing, intimidating, demeaning, victimizing, or having the effect of creating a hostile environment." (Fire.com). This speech code does not affect how I view the college. Although I can see the argument that this infringes on students' First Amendment rights, it does not bother me personally. I see it as the schools responsibility to protect all of its students, obviously including the minorities. On campus, the college should be able to make rules in order to protect its students. If the students don't agree with the college, they don't have to go to that school. If the situation above happened at DePaul, I think DePaul would not seek a harsh punishment for the students who put those pictures up. Instead they would force them to take them down because of the policy I posted above. It says that DePaul has the rights to take down and displays that are discriminatory or show harassment. The students might also get another punishment though for the act of harassment, because those picture portray lynching and other forms of discriminatory and nondiscriminatory harassment. I agree that the school should have the right to take those pictures down for those reasons, and also to carry out a minor punishment for the actions in the pictures.
FIRE, an organization that protects the rights of students, has its own beliefs on when speech codes are acceptable and when they are not. They think all actions displaying one's own ideas should be allowed because they are protected under the First Amendment. However, harassment is not protected and therefore should be banned. I agree with their ideas and think they are fighting for a good cause. However, I also understand why some school have certain speech codes and I personally don't mind them. I do think that some people would feel like their rights were violated and should then join with FIRE to fight for their beliefs.

10th Anniversary of 9/11

I never really understood September 11th until I watched the documentary "9/11". I was young when it happened and although I remember it every year, I really got what actually happened. This film made it all clear to me. I learned something about my country from this film. No matter what happens to the United States, it never gives up. The firefighters exemplified this in the movie when they continued to go back to the site over and over again, no matter what had just taken place. They were determined to do all they could to fix or alleviate what had just happened.
An article on CNN's website titled, "We Must Pay Our Debt to 9/11 Heroes," was Senator Kirsten Gillibrand views on post 9/11 effects. She states, "More than 30,000 responders and survivors from across the country have had to be medically treated because of their exposure to ground zero toxins." On that day in 2001, Americans rushed to help however they could. They all wanted to help save whoever they could and assist in the clean up. No one had time to think of how the conditions would effect their health in years to come. At the time rescuing a devastated city was more important. Senator Gillibrand is for a law that would ensure all these 9/11 heroes proper medical treatment to all World Trade Center related diseases and health defects. I have to agree with her. The firefighters and even just the ordinary people who came out that day and acted as our heroes cannot be forgotten or left behind. Although it has been 10 years we cannot forget what they did. As fellow Americans it is now our duty to help them as they have already sacrificed to help us.
How has 9/11 impacted my life today? I grew up post 9/11 and can't really compare my life now to how I lived before it happened. I hear that before 9/11 you could actually get on a plane with a bottle of shampoo. This change has to be one of the least significant ones. For me growing up post 9/11, I have lived with racism towards Arabs and Muslims my whole life. I can't compare to how it was before 9/11, but I do know that it is prevalent in my country. Just because my country sees them equal by law does not mean they do not face racism in their every day lives. I've always been raised to treat others equally and not to discriminate, but I also grew up around all the jokes. "That guy over there with the head-wrap... stay away he's probably got a bomb on him." Just because someone may say it in a joking matter, does not erase the fact that those stereotypes exist. The fact that someone finds it funny shows subconscious racist thoughts. How did America, the country where all men are created equal, get this way. 9/11 was such a tragedy to all Americans that perhaps they were looking for someone to blame for everything we lost. This seems counterproductive. After such a tragic event, America should be coming together and embracing everything it stands for. That is true victory. Not forgetting our core beliefs and starting to discriminate against others. Some say America has lost its integrity after 9/11, but I don't see it. The immense amount of firefighters and citizens that came out to help that day show what great character exists within our country. If America continues to discriminate or stand by as others do, only then will we start to lose our integrity as a free and equal democracy.

CAN SCHOOLS VIOLATE THE FIRST AMMENDMENT RIGHTS OF STUDENTS?

Can a school take away the first ammendment right of a student and then go ahead and say it was in the best interest of the student? Wouldn't the best interest of the student be their first ammendment rights? Well, no. Very often two values overlap eachother. In these cases sacrifices are to be made. I hope we would all want the kind of government that looks out for our safety and well being. We see freedom of speech as a way to ensure our safety as free people. But, what if that speech offset a reaction that posed a danger to society. Surely physical safety is as important as freedom. One would not exist without the other. So in order to get that balance, the governent is and should be allowed to ban certain "speech". We see this in schools. Certain language or even symbolic speech has the potential to hurt other students. It could directly lead to physical bullying, or lead to students commiting suicide. The school is doing a good job by preveting certain "speech" that might cause one of these. Freedom of speech is important, but safety is important too. The schools are acting for the better of the students by limiting freedom of speech to some extent.