Tuesday, January 30, 2018
UVA tries to criminalize free speech
The Thomas Jefferson Center for the Protection of Free Expression, which is located in Charlottesville and is dedicated to “the defense of free expression in all its forms,” gives out annual awards called the “Jefferson Muzzles” to individuals and organizations responsible for “especially egregious or ridiculous affronts to free expression.”
The center’s first such award this year should go to the Jefferson-founded University of Virginia (which has close ties to the center) and Patrick D. Hogan, the university’s executive vice president and chief operating officer.
Hogan might also benefit from sitting in as an observer at one of the University of Virginia School of Law’s classes explaining the basic tenets of the First Amendment.
On Jan. 19, Hogan sent out a “community advisory” in an email to all students, faculty, and staff, warning them that the university was “aware of reports of solicitations by national organizations to encourage distribution of offensive flyers and memes at colleges and universities across the country during the upcoming weekend.”
Apparently, in Hogan’s mind, saying something “offensive” is the same as committing a heinous criminal act. How do we know that? Because his email tells students to call 911 if they see someone “posting offensive flyers or other material.”
No, really. Posting such material violates the university’s “posting and chalking” policy and is included in Hogan’s definition of “suspicious activity.”
Hogan was particularly concerned over any “offensive” material that might be distributed at “buildings and centers for under-represented groups, particularly Women’s Studies.”
In other words, if you decide to exercise your First Amendment right to speak at UVA by, perhaps, calling the “Women’s Study” program a faux social science curriculum, or by pointing out that its graduates may have a very tough time finding a job in which they can actually support themselves, then law enforcement officers will be called to come after you—a total abuse of the 911 emergency response system.
SOURCE
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I find Patrick Hogan's emails "offensive." Should I call 911 and report him for committing a heinous crime?
Frankly this Pat Hogan needs a little lesson about the U.S, Constitution and Free Speech that he work learn from reading The Communists Manifesto or a liberal written text book
I actually went looking for the email. If it is out there, I can't find it.
Without the actual email, it is possible that the author is taking the thing out of context. (Gee, like the Daily Signal would never, ever do that).
Take for example the first quoted portion of the alleged email:
...aware of reports of solicitations by national organizations to encourage distribution of offensive flyers and memes at colleges and universities across the country during the upcoming weekend.
The author of the article takes that as a condemnation of free speech. So let's say for the sake of argument that the flyers were:
- from the KKK advocating white supremacy.
- from groups like BLM, advocating anarchy and hatred of whites.
- religions who want to put women back in the kitchen and out of the workplace.
Are any of those ideas "offensive?" Isn't it "free speech" to be able to label somethings as "offensive?"
The amazing thing is that the Daily Signal wants an award to be given to the President for being against free speech and at the same time seeking to muzzle Hogan's speech.
The author makes the claim that Hogan is looking to criminalize the speech and yet does not offer one shred or iota of proof. There is no quote from the email, no previous statements, nothing.
"We are aware" does not mean that Hogan wants to take action against those posting the flyers or handing out the pamphlets. One would think that saying "we are aware of the solicitations and we need to suck it up and allow the speech and disagree with it" is well within the realm of free speech.
People are free to believe what they want. but this article is lacking in content and context and should be viewed skeptically.
I guess "women" are now the main focus group for offence since the "metoo" thing. It is hard to keep track. Once was Blacks, LGBQT, non-binary, Hispanics. What will be next? The only thing I am certain it will not be is Straight white males.
Post a Comment