FREE ESSAY ON HATE SPEECH AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT

HATE SPEECH AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT

On college campuses today the debate rages to limit certain kinds of speech that is
racists and sexist, some students say that they have a right to say what ever they what
because of the First Amendment and doing so will a volition of this right, but this kind
of speech threatens the rights of minorities and dose let them engage in the leering
process. Freedom of speech and the exchange of ideas are important in colleges, but when
this type of speech is allowed onto college campus it creates an atmosphere where
minorities are left out and do not participate in the exchange of ideas, and in the
learning process.
Some universities are trying to curtail this kind of speech buy putting in place speech
codes but they are meet with unsuccessful results. Some say that the speech codes are not
in-forced or the institution ignores them. The power of the university to abolish this
kind of speech depends on how much the institution is willing to participate in the
process, and its ability to punish the speaker, but is censorship the answer in the fight
of this kind speech.
Censorship is powerful weapon in fight of this kind but it can also backfire. They can
use it to hear what you want to hear leave out the main idea, give only one point of
view. Which is not conducive for the exchange of ideas in a learning institution, which
is the main purpose of speech, as Eleanor Holmes Norton has said: "It is technically
impossible to write an anti-speech code that cannot be twisted against speech nobody
means to bar. It has been tried and tried and tried"
But is speech codes and censorship what is the answer to this problem, then what is the
solution to the problem. Some say to surprise that more speech not less needed to educate
others and provide equality. Banning hate speech creates an expectation to the first
amendment, which strips way it's meaning. The purist of education will come from
discussion of cultural differences, historical happenings and present-day use of the
language. To teach students to refrain from such of language would deny an opportunity to
further explore the meaning of equality and understanding of the words, which a tolerant
society and democrat society must allow. As the dean of University of Chicago of Law
Geoffrey Stone as said "The social climate is suddenly less tolerant to free expression
across a wide range of issue. One theme in all of these cases is that we can adjust our
concept of free speech, slice off a few tiny corners and leave the core intact. But
that's the argument that always been used to justify restricting speech". I agree with
the dean that we have become a less tolerant society, and that w