Feed on
Posts
Comments

Will there be a hemorrhage of diversity and intelligence to friendlier waters?

5/7/2008, 12:40 p.m. EDT

By DAVID EGGERT

The Associated Press

LANSING, Mich. (AP) — The Michigan Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a 2004 ban against gay marriage also blocks governments and state universities from offering health insurance to the partners of gay workers.

The 5-2 decision affirms a state Court of Appeals ruling.

Up to 20 public universities, community colleges, school districts and local governments in Michigan have benefits policies covering at least 375 gay couples. Some of the plans began as far back as the early 1990s.

After the appeals court ruled in February 2007, universities and governments rewrote their policies to try to comply with the gay marriage ban — so the effect of Wednesday’s decision was unclear.

The new policies no longer specifically acknowledge domestic partnerships but make sure “other qualified adults,” including gay partners, are eligible for medical and dental care. The adults have to live together for a certain amount of time, be unmarried, share finances and be unrelated.

The voter-approved law, which passed 59 percent to 41 percent, says the union between a man and woman is the only agreement recognized as a marriage “or similar union for any purpose.”

Justice Stephen Markman, writing for the majority, said that while marriages and domestic partnerships aren’t identical, they are similar. He was joined by Chief Justice Clifford Taylor and Justices Maura Corrigan, Elizabeth Weaver and Robert Young Jr.

Dissenting Justices Michael Cavanagh and Marilyn Kelly said the constitutional amendment prohibits nothing more than same-sex marriages or similar unions. They argued that circumstances surrounding the election suggest Michigan voters didn’t intent to take away people’s benefits.

Republican Attorney General Mike Cox in 2005 interpreted the measure to make unconstitutional existing domestic partner policies at the city of Kalamazoo and elsewhere.

Twenty-one gay couples sued, saying the amendment was about marriage and preserving the status quo — not taking away benefits from gays. Democratic Gov. Jennifer Granholm sided with the couples.

The couples represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan argued the ballot committee that sponsored Proposal 2 “consistently and repeatedly” assured voters that the initiative was only about protecting marriage.

But Markman noted that both supporters and opponents of the amendment said ahead of time that benefits would be prohibited by the amendment.

“The role of this Court is not to determine who said what about the amendment before it was ratified, or to speculate about how these statements may have influenced voters,” he wrote. “Instead, our responsibility is, as it has always been in matters of constitutional interpretation, to determine the meaning of the amendment’s actual language.”

Kelly countered that gay partners allowed to get health insurance aren’t granted other rights, responsibilities or benefits of marriage — equal rights to property, for instance.

“It is an odd notion to find that a union that shares only one of the hundreds of benefits that a marriage provides is a union similar to marriage,” she wrote.

Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

© 2008 Michigan Live. All Rights Reserved.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From www.Ourfuture.org

By Rick Perlstein

May 5th, 2008 - 1:53pm ET  

 

Mildred Loving was a black woman who married a white man in Virginia, which was against the law in the state. She took her case all the way up to the Supreme Court, which struck down interracial marriage bans in the 1967 Loving v. Virginia decision. Today it was announced that she has died at the age of 68. But what her AP obituary doesn’t mention—hopefully others will correct the oversight—is that last year Mildred Loving came out foursquare for marriage equality for same-sex couples as well, and insisted you should, too.

 

 

Here was her statement:

 

 

Loving for All

By Mildred Loving

Prepared for Delivery on June 12, 2007,
The 40th Anniversary of the Loving vs. Virginia Announcement

When my late husband, Richard, and I got married in Washington, DC in 1958, it wasn’t to make a political statement or start a fight. We were in love, and we wanted to be married.

We didn’t get married in Washington because we wanted to marry there. We did it there because the government wouldn’t allow us to marry back home in Virginia where we grew up, where we met, where we fell in love, and where we wanted to be together and build our family. You see, I am a woman of color and Richard was white, and at that time people believed it was okay to keep us from marrying because of their ideas of who should marry whom.

When Richard and I came back to our home in Virginia, happily married, we had no intention of battling over the law. We made a commitment to each other in our love and lives, and now had the legal commitment, called marriage, to match. Isn’t that what marriage is?

Not long after our wedding, we were awakened in the middle of the night in our own bedroom by deputy sheriffs and actually arrested for the “crime” of marrying the wrong kind of person. Our marriage certificate was hanging on the wall above the bed.

The state prosecuted Richard and me, and after we were found guilty, the judge declared:
 “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.” He sentenced us to a year in prison, but offered to suspend the sentence if we left our home in Virginia for 25 years exile.

We left, and got a lawyer. Richard and I had to fight, but still were not fighting for a cause. We were fighting for our love.

Though it turned out we had to fight, happily Richard and I didn’t have to fight alone. Thanks to groups like the ACLU and the NAACP Legal Defense & Education Fund, and so many good people around the country willing to speak up, we took our case for the freedom to marry all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. And on June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that, “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men,” a “basic civil right.”

My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God’s plan to keep people apart, and that government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation’s fears and prejudices have given way, and today’s young people realize that if someone loves someone they have a right to marry.

Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don’t think of Richard and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the “wrong kind of person” for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people’s religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people’s civil rights.

I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a courtcase that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.

 

 

“Would America be better off if we learned to disagree more civilly?  Is this even possible?”

 

Yes, uncivil disagreement only leads to violence.  Violence is one issue that does no good to anyone anywhere, ever.  This leads to verbal as well as physical violence.Yes, we need to get back to our roots.  I believe that instead of requiring a “junk class” for a degree we should require ethics and debating skills.—Margo KincaidWhy should this even be in question?—DRAmerica would be better off if we all would just watch fox newsI do think we’d be better off if we learned to disagree civilly.  Unfortunately, I don’t think that’s possible.  Human beings are different from all other animals because we have the ability to be irrational.  Because of this, I’m sure there is no way everyone can disagree civilly; only some of us.Yes it is possible to disagree civilly!Yes. Yes! Every one of us is human, and deserves to be heard.—Regina B.I agree to disagree civilly because we must first model for students starting with middle & high school students for them to see how we should disagree.Yes, it would be better but unfortunately not easy.  There are too many people who love to make hate and divide discourse.  It would take a lot of compassion and cooperation, but it is possible!  MSI agree I feel that anything is possible we just have to put forth the effort and be mom understanding this could solve a lot of arguments and essentially give both sides tend to listen more to each other.Civil behavior in any disagreement automatically serves a greater good.  If people were open to compromise a new solutions to problem America would be a much better country for it!—KPAmerica would be better off but it is difficult to get to that part.  Words are immensely powerful and many times have been used to hurt.  Until Americans can first learn to listen, we can not speak civilly.Agree to Disagree! I agree!Me too!Absolutely it’s possible. We learn to listen and respect one another in kindergarten—when do those values get lost?Yes, being tolerant is what it’s all about!  Or the same note so is being unique.—JWAmerica would be better if we learned to disagree civilly.  Not every one will see things the way you will.  The different options make-up America.  Just because there are the disagreements, that doesn’t mean that people have to behave rudely and hate one another.  As the saying goes, you can “Agree to Disagree”.  Shebra Moore.I think it’s better if we can at least try to understand different views.It would be better off to have courteous & civil discussion.  It is okay to disagree- someday our egos will learn this.It would be better if we learned to disagree civilly with one another.  If we can learn to respect one another’s opinion although one may disagree with it, it creates a more respectful/positive atmosphere.Yes, if we can try to understand why people have different opinions, we can better understand that they have valid reasons for thinking differently than we do.It would definitely be better if we could agree civilly.  No brainer.  Respect of others is the key!Some situations would be better solved in civil manner but when the argument is between different countries sometimes it’s better to just drop bombs.Of course!  It may be nearly impossible though.  Most conflicts are caused by miscommunication and the inability of people to be open minded about issues.  If we could at least try to see things from the other person’s point of view and ultimately agree to disagree then we would be much better off :) Yes it is possible to disagree civilly we can agree to disagree or learn to accept other opinions.Yes America would be better off!  Although people probably wouldn’t do it!  It is [possible but not likely…TDAmerica would benefit from more reasonable arguments.  If people entered into a discussion willing to be proven wrong, and accept that they may not know everything than there will be less violent disagreements.We can agree to disagree.  That’s what a healthy debate is about. It’s when our personal biases inform how we think & speak that causes problems!We need to really think more critically about what civil disobedience really mean!  When we do it will be useful tool to pull conversations to the table.It is possible to disagree in a civil manner, one just needs to ‘get over’ their need to be right understand it is okay for others to have opinions which are different from yours not right a wrong just different & okay.Yes America would be better if we learned to agree to disagree everyone is different this is what makes this country unique we can all learn from one another if we learn to respect and appreciate the differences Love is the Key.I think it is possible.  Have rules of debates like candidates do.Often a message is not heard if the language is offensive.. Expect respect is a positive ideal which we as parents and teachers and humans need to enforce in our homes, schools, and communities.  If a term is hateful the speaker needs to know and be told how it feels to the listener before real dialogue can happen.—Pat Emanyou If we learned civilly there would be less violence in the world and would make the world better to live in and a safer place to live and growWe need to disagree in a civil way in a sophisticated wayI believe that if people took the time to say things in a better way we would be a lot better off. People wouldn’t take offensive if things were better said.Yes, agree to disagree—that’s my definition of ‘civil’.  Let’s try it!Yes, we would be better off.  However teaching people to disagree civilly would be very difficult.  So many are quick to want to get into a fight over something- instead of talking it out-it would take a long time to change!It is possible but it takes maturity and respect to disagree with someone yet acknowledge that they have a right to their opinion.Obviously, this is what should happen.  Everyone has an opinion, and even though some may be more radical, all views should be expressed.Yes, it is important for us to all realized that everyone has different views and opinions.   It would be possible for us to respect others opinions and decide arguments by what the public sees as more logical.Organizations don’t really agree to this point of view, they are for profit & try their best to oppose anything against the profit of the organization.  But none the less it would be better if we could do that.Everyone has different views & opinions in America but when they speak cruelly in order to outright offend the opposition it is wrong.  We would get more accomplished as a country & therefore a union if we all learned to strongly voice opinions civilly & put our differences toward a common goal rather than make it a point to see who can bash the other side harsher.

“Should the traditional views about free speech apply to the internet?”

 

 

 Yes, if people are free to say things in person, why not on the internet?  Of course, they should be ready to take the repercussions for their words as usual.Even if the government put a ban on free speech on the internet, they can not stop it completely.  Just like the government can’t stop file sharing!  So free speech is, and always be apart of the internet.If free speech is not granted on the internet, America will end up like China, which sensors everything on the net.  How can people voice their opinions to the whole world on line if they fear repercussions?The internet is a free for all.  We should focus on combating illegal gambling & porn before we even consider such a thing.NO!—Margo Kincaid If free speech is applied to the internet, then the person who posted their views should take full responsibility for what was said & should also be able to defend their views.  Some people hide behind their views on the internet because they don’t want to confront issues head on.Yes.  The net is a great forum to practice free speech w/out being afraid of who see’s it. What are “traditional Views”? I believe you should be allowed to speak about what every you want no matter what the forum is.YES!No because this place where people can gather info of all forms. C.B.Free speech should be on internet it should not cost.You should be able to say what you want to say, internet or not!—M.S.Yes, I think that they should apply to the internet. The internet is really just one big news station.—KPNo—‘traditional’ implies tolerance of views such as those of China, whom filter web-based content.  Any and all forms of communication should be limitless—DTS The internet is the ultimate free speech vehicle.  We can find words we agree with and those who do not.  We should all have the choice over what we wish to view, and not let others dictate it to us.Since the internet is becoming more & more of a traditional method of doing things, why should it be taken any other way?  The internet is words..not actions. Yes, even with new technology the same freedoms should apply. 

Yes, the internet is another way of communicating. If free speech applies to verbal communication (which could be offensive) then the internet should be no different—EAPYes, People deserve their right to speak when and wherever they please, you should never hold back on words; be as blunt as possible!Yes, the internet is merely another form of communication, not a system of lower standards—Sequanan TolonYes, because the concept of free speech should be universal to all forms of media—Matt Rogers I think the bigger issue with the internet is liability, copyright infringement, etc. I think internet is still speech so people don’t have the right to stop your thoughts.Of course.  The internet is an extension of the media, press, etc.  Freedom of Speech, Baby! Of course!  Especially because it’s easier to gain access to multiple views-it may help make someone make a clearer and more informed decision on what they believe.Yes! The internet should be regarded as a glorified newspaper/journal on steroids. It is merely and easily accessible forum with everyone’s views & porn!  –P.S.The internet should be allowed the traditional free speech, yet I believe the internet is ot an offensive way to communicate beliefs!  Justin HiltonYes—including the responsibilities of free speech, the internet communicator needs to be aware of libel and slander laws.  And be courageous enough to sign their name, and be sincere enough to defend their views—Deb White Yes, the internet is an extension of press, newspapers, tv commercials, etc.Yes, I think it should apply because the 1st amendment says freedom of speech which can apply everywhere in the country even streets…Yes-but remember in today’s world w/today’s technology we need to be careful!Yes though the internet is a new mode of communication our views should mainly apply.  Views and standards should drastically change with modes of communication; however adaptation does need to occur.Obviously, it’s the internet.  No one owns the World Wide Web and if someone did then the worlds in trouble./The internet is a place for traditional and non-traditional expressions of free-speech.  This will always remain as long as there is an internet.  This avenue of free speech allows us to open our minds and learn more about our differences.Yes, if you start taking away a little bit of freedom where will it all end!  M.M.Yes, however with the internet there is no guarantee who you are talking to, making everything different.The UM-Flint has more things to empower like “Free Speech”. We have the right to say what we feel. “Silence won’t protect you A. LordeYes, because you can’t give a right and but guidelines or rules on it.  It’s all or none on freedom.Yes, but free speech doesn’t mean someone can’t respect others. Yes, because it’s about what we think. We need to think before we write.Everyone has a right to freedom of speech.  In addition, if our thoughts are not verbalized then it would be extremely difficult to form resolutions.  Communications is the key in forming strong relationships.

Freedom of Speech should always apply, no matter where it is.  There’s a reason it’s in the constitution.Yes…..Free speech applies to the internet.  If free speech hurts us that’s bad, if free speech makes us think that’s good, if free speech makes think and find a solution…that’s really good!!!Yes, as a culture that is allowing young people on line things must different.  Kids adapt to what they see.  They must be protected.As much filth as there is on the internet involving drugs, se, violence, and prejudice, I should definitely be able to day what I want.Yes, the internet is just another means of communication.Yes the traditional views about free speech should apply tithe internet.  I believe this because what you write on the internet can be copied & pasted.  So if you say something that you might regret it will be on there for a long time.The internet is basically a form of communication.  If we can’t express ourselves here, what form of communication will be next? 

During a time of crisis, is free speech more important or more dangerous?

 

Free speech should be accepted as long as it’s not derogatory.During a time of crisis free speech is more dangerous individually!  It’s better to come together collectively in a structural manner to discuss the dynamics of human resources, symbolism, politicalism, & structuralism in order to stay connected to the crisis at hand.In a time of crisis “Freedom of Speech” is more important when it is used to free people and more dangerous when used to enslave people—Margo KincaidFree speech is more important so that our country doesn’t make rash decisions.

Free speech is more dangerous in a time of crisis we need to come together to work on a solution.  When people start expressing their strong views it can offend others and cause more problems.Free speech could be more dangerous because sometimes people get very angry at others views and it sometimes causes controversy.Free speech is dangerous.

I believe that it’s even more important during a crisis because discourse is healthy.  We are not a monolithic nation and our diverse experiences should be celebrated, not demonized.I think that free speech would depend.  It would depend on the type of crisis and the type of speech that is being displayed.  It could be more important in an incident like 9/11 where our speech unifies us as a nation, but more dangerous when burning the American flag or speech that will bring lots of conflict.Dangerous, sometimes rights can get in the way of solving a problem quite effectively.There are too many underlying possibilities to “time of crisis” to answer this the way the question is posed.I believe that during a time of crisis, freedom of speech is very important.  Throughout history protests, demonstrations, and great leaders pulled us out of times of crisis through the freedom of speech. As long as people stay respectful and hate is not generated, freedom of speech should continue.—Abrar JondyDepends on the subject that is being voiced.Free speech is most important during a crisis because that’s when people tend to think in a mold.  Being able to speak freely about what’s going on allows people to reflect back on the happenings.Everyone has a right to free speech however in a crisis situation this has to become limited because however harsh or innocent the situation is things can be said that could harm the person who said it, those around them and everyone because affected by this because it can drastically change the situation to a severe case.Free speech is always good!During a crisis, free speech is even more important so that people aren’t penalized for disagreeing with the status quo. If it is restricted- people are more likely to lash out negatively if people don’t agree with the majority.During crisis, free speech is both important and dangerous.  When it has the ability to harm others, it is dangerous, but when it is during a time of oppression, it is extremely important.Free speech is going to be more dangerous. However, that doesn’t mean you should not voice your opinion. You should voice them louder!!!However sometimes it is the only channel for change and from people to express their ideas therefore, I believe it depends on the particular situation.It is not doubt that freedom of speech is always an asset but during times of crisis it could be dangerous and may create more conflict.—Rana ArdabaghFreedom of speech can be both depending on who it is directed at.I feel that free speech is more useful in a crisis because it makes us still recognize our freedom and liberty and realize anybody has the right to say anything.Yes free speech is important. Actually it is more important because it allows the individuals of the community to express themselves and come up with a group decision about how they can come up with an effective solution. JIt is neither, as a matter of fact it is less important, because everyone has something today but no one is being heard.Come & join for free speech, try something to give to community to change something by speech.  It more important to have.Free speech is important but still…It should mot hurt others!!Both.  In times of flux info is more vital & more potent than normal.  People must be informed, but journalists must be responsible.Free speech is always important –Nicole Anthony.Free speech is more important.More important … everyone deserves to be heard.It gives everyone an equal opportunity to express their feelings.Free speech is more important during a crisis. 

Free speech is always important, & probably always dangerous.  Freedom does not imply the lack of responsibility for the speaker.  In a time of crisis, that responsibility is heightened.  AvivaDuring a crisis, free speech can be more dangerous because people can incite riots and endanger the lives of others.People should have the right to say what they feel at all

times.~B.BoydDefinitely more important.  If not we are left with silence and feer.  John CallenwaertIt can be important & dangerous depending on what is said.  The important thing is to respect others & their opinions, traditions, etc. No matter what!Free speech is most important during a crisis.  Specifically revolutionary times.During a crisis, I believe free speech is recognized as more dangerous, only with the way the individual says it.  If it is needed to be heard, though, that’s what the amendment is for!—Shannen HawkinsDuring times of crisis speech is a two edge sword.  It expressed how the individuals of society feel about the situation but there are those who will take advantage of free speech to promote their own hidden agendas.  George WilkesIt is very important.  A crisis demands the input of all individuals, no matter how different the input is. 

Free speech can be both if there aren’t people there who don’t want to listen.During a crisis free speech can be both.Free speech is not free! 

During a crisis I believe it is imperative that speech, our speech be made known because there may not be another opportunity to do so, because opportunity does not leave it just goes to another person.Free speech is even more important during times of crisis.  A great example of this is the war in Iraq.  Had we been more vocal & had we questioned more, we might not be in the situation we are in.Free speech is always important as an American.  During war things people say can be blown out of proportion and Flare up thoughts of what is right and wrong.  During war it is important to speak freely, but think before hand—Nick ConleyFree speech is not free but open talks are always important.The most critical time for free speech is during a crisis.Free speech should never be unimportant or dangerous.  A time of crisis simply offers us the opportunity to apply the knowledge gained from free speech to work, unified, to over come the crisis.Free speech is important during a time of crisis because people’s ideas & opinions could be useful or motivational to others.Free speech is always important…for good, bad, during a crisis, for peace, against hate, bigotry, fear…Free speech is always our right but during a time of crisis individuals are morally obligated to shoe restraint to not further escalate problems.It is very important, but should be used in a more tactful manner during times of crisis.  Just b/c you can say something doesn’t mean you should.I feel like depending on a situation, freedom of speech can be dangerous.  Although everyone should have a right to day what they want to say, but if it’s negative it doesn’t make the world a better place. I only causes danger to our community and each other.During a crisis free speech is vital. Without speech the prevailing ideology has no opposition. 

It depends on who is speaking, if they are ignorant to the main ideas of which they speak they could escalate the crisis.It is very important in times of crisis.  Suppressed information can & has let to genocide and other atrocities.It is more important because free speech is what is right with or country.Free speech is appropriate if it is purposeful.Free speech is important during a time of crisis because people’s ideas and opinions could be useful or motivational to others. 

 

 

 

 

Should universities be more tolerant or less tolerant of speech that might be offensive than other institutions?

 

I believe universities should be less tolerant of offensive speech.  I think that individuals should be respectful of each other and although that means accepting each other’s faults it would allow for and environment that is accepting and inviting.  It’s time we started being a civilized, respectful civilization.Less tolerant because we are here to teach or should I say educate people on how to accept others not just tolerate them—Margo KincaidLess tolerant of offensive speech because the educational environment should be conducive to growth and individuality.  Hateful speech stunts growth & does not encourage individuality—Jessica AnthonyMore tolerant because it allows kids to open their horizons.In terms of hate speech I believe the responsibility to be less tolerant since not all groups on campus might feel they are able to speak out against intolerance for their group.  Good examples are international students who do not feel they have the same freedoms to speak as Americans do.They should be more tolerant, because universities should be a mature, open community on what individuals have to say.Yes, I believe that a University is a place for exploration.  Unfortunately, I believe it has become a place where antagonizing is more the norm and traditional values are frowned upon.It should be more tolerant because it allows people to speak their truth and  reality.More.Universities have always been a ground that promotes rights of speech.  However in times of war there should be a limit to what people say…not!!!—Juan GarciaTotally.  Universities are the institutions of initial learning so I believe either catches it young or it will kill u.  It is easier to control it at this point then let it blow out of proportions.No, they shouldn’t be more tolerant of speech that might be offensive to others.Yes universities should be tolerant.  Thins is the time in life when people discover themselves.   You need to support what we say, and then ask, ‘why do you feel that way.”—William SarosyBoth students & universities should be more tolerant.Being offended by something causes new thoughts and different perspectives by all parties included.  Universities should promote full speech as much as possible.More tolerant because they have the power to teach us how to express ourselves properly.Tolerance is a great attitude to have.  I think we should all be tolerant of speech, until it becomes a hate speech.  Historically, hate speeches, lead to hate crimes.  There should never be tolerance for crimes, especially dealing with oppression!  “Your silence will not protect you!” I love Kristi.No public institution should have independent, arbitrary controls over speech within its premises.They should allow us to speak freely, however, offensive language should not be allowed.Tolerant? Accepting who defines what is offensive?  Everyone should be able to say what they want as long as they understand others may disagree and that’s okay.  There can speak, others can protest peacefully or respond peacefully.—Q.P.S.Yes they should because some people might get offended and some might not, but respect everyone’s feelings.Institutions should be less tolerant more than ever, because times are changing and individuals are getting bolder.  Meaning that people will say almost anything without feeling remorse or regret if it should offend anyone.  Also, students do not pay thousands in tuition only to come to school and hear someone speak out of order and cause discomfort.Universities have a huge responsibility to facilitate free speech- and then talk, talk, and talk about it.When it comes to offensive speech, it’s hard to say.  If a person or persons are saying things to purposefully cause problems and be hateful, then universities should not allow such behavior.  It’s fine to have free speech as long as no one is feeling threatened or unsafe.  If the free speech cause A MAJOR PROBLEM, then the university should find a way to handle the issue so that free speech is not stopped but voiced differently.—Shebra MooreI think we need to consider the difference between expressing a view on an issue and a personal or cultural attack.  The first promotes dialog, the second anger, hurt and division- for me that’s an important difference to consider.—VickyI believe that the university should be less tolerant of speech that may be offensive.  As American’s, we pride ourselves on being a “civilized people”.  We are suppose to be accepting of diversity, extending generosity, love, peace, etc… Yet, we are so quick to harm others with our words (in the name of free speech).  The wisdom of this thing is—we may not always agree, but we respect one another.  Give respect to get respect of Human Life.No, freedom of speech is a right.  No one should be punished because they express how they feel.Yes, non-tolerance on freedom of speech on universities breeds students who are ignorant and merely sheep.  Bad things happen.  The truth hurts. As long as it is intellectually standing and in an appropriate manner, freedom of speech in colleges, universities is the only way.I believe that universities should be more tolerant just more cautious about those who want to say anything that might offend citizens.

This is about so much more than ‘putting up with’. It’s not about tolerance at all.  It is the responsibility of the university to promote, encourage and even insist upon free thought and speech.  We don’t have to agree, but we must respect each other!I agree.They should be more tolerant.  It is a critical place to learn…without complete free speech you take away from that.I think they should help “teach” acceptance by learning about our differences and in learning about them help all to find how much we are alike (inside) regardless of color, race, religion, etc.No! Simple…creates diversity.Universities should be more tolerant, because they should always think of the greater good of all students!!Everyone has the right to speak their opinions.  The university cannot regulate what is said. However offensive context should immediately be reported and seriously considered.  Offensive content should not be tolerated.I think universities should be less tolerant.  People are to say what they want.  But we should still be sensitive.I believe there should be boundaries, but they should also be reasonable.I don’t think it’s a matter of tolerance, as much as I think we should/need to be professional and accepting of each other and speech.I believe the university should be more tolerant to some speech.  They all must be suitable for school and others should be left at home.I think that the university should be more tolerant, and think in such a way that is does not affect the student’s progress.I believe people need to learn how to word what they say. Everything can be said it a tasteful way.

Universities of all places should be hotbeds of debate, argument, discussion, dissent, dialogue, and FREEDOM OF SPEECH. The wish to clamp down on speech that may hurt someone’s feelings is worthy of a totalitarian society, not America.  Telling people that they must never offend anyone may be sound advice foe small children.  College students are adults.  Speech codes ought to be consigned to the dustbin of history, along with other Stalinist relics.—Paul StrebyThe University should be a harmonious atmosphere where students come to learn.  Anything that inhibits this and creates animosity between individuals should not be tolerated, including free speech.—Rana A.I am not sure that UMF can be more tolerant than it already is.Out ability to have many different points of view batted around is what allows us to flex the muscles of democracy!  With out this we would be whimps, just like any totalitarian government you might think of. –Laura Frieson-LynnI believe that we all have a right to express ourselves.  But, we need to understand that expressing one’s self should not come to the detriment of others.  If we all learned to communicate how we felt and what we feel in a civilized manner our points can be gotten across and have the influence we want. 

Universities should be more tolerant because it is the perfect environment for people to become educated through discussion.  When discussions spark, people become less ignorant of situations and more open towards other views.—Abrar JondyUniversities should have venues to debate, because there must be discussions at intellectual institutions.

Have you ever wanted to speak up about something important but did not?  What was it about?  Why didn’t you feel free to voice you thoughts? 

 Some of my favorite experiences from my undergrad education were open debates like creationism v. evolution, leader v. follower, capitalist v. communist.  These memories would fade as failed lessons plans if people did not speak out.  Fear of judgment keeps people quiet.  But when you reach out, when you PERSONALIZE diversity, you find the conversation changes from us v. them to you and me. Imagine…-C. Dilg Yes, I always wanted to speak something which I couldn’t speak till now. I think it’s stupid that the U.S. is in Iraq.  There’s no weapons, so we should be outta there! –Jason A. I wanted to speak up about the siege on Gaza, put I was afraid people would label me Anti-Semitic even though I am far from it. Freedom to day what ever you want to say –Ramesh Yes, I have wanted to speak up many times, However I have  “kept my mouth shut” because I have found that the times I have been angered by others it is because of their ignorance and it is hard to argue with a fool.—Margo Kincaid Sometimes it is best to keep your mouth shut. On the issue of equality in the U.S. I’m often discouraged with comments such as, “African Americans need to get over what happened to them 200 years ago.”  This points to the core problem of misunderstanding the repercussions of the past.  Yes, slavery was abolished 200 years ago, but segregation continued legally until the 60”s.  This segregation created a separate subculture for the black community.  The differences that remain in the 2 communities are key to understanding how to fix the problem.  Europe just recently overcame the final repercussions of the plague from the 14th & 15th centuries, so to believe that the distant past does not directly affect the present is ignorance…or neglect.  Creation vs. evolution is important and should be explored but I’m told that I would be forcing my beliefs on others if I speak up. Yes, it was about affirmative action and it should be allowed for white.  I didn’t speak on it because I didn’t experience it when U of M had it. But I felt it was unfair to single out a group.—Michelle Fischer I feel this way a lot, actually.  I’m totally IN LOVE with God, and I sometimes feel I can’t necessarily share it with other people.  If you bring religious views into discussions, people get upset, ad, offended, put-off, etc.  I’m not going to judge people if they believe differently then I do, and I feel like having a spiritual relationship with God qualifies me automatically as closed minded or a Bible-thumper.  I’m neither of those things, and all I want to do is share the greatest love of/in my life. Currently, I’m seeking support from many parts of UM-Flint in order to make a difference locally.  I’m biding my time—when I do speak out, I hope it will make a difference! Not really, we didn’t like the policy of reservation based on caste so we oppose it hands down. Yes, I wanted to speak about the injustice that was occurring in Iraq.  The reason I didn’t was because I felt I didn’t have enough knowledge to do so and no support from UM-Flint. Yes, often I wish to speak out about my religion but don’t because it is not a majority religion.  I hold back so not to cause undo tension or verbal violence. No, as long as I can remember I’ve always spoken out—whether it was good or not.  I wish more people would especially about minority culture.  The only way the majority can learn anything new/different is if they are given more information.  Sadly, minorities feel uncomfortable because we’ve made it uncool to be different from the majority. Yes.  I wanted to ask about test questions, but I couldn’t ask in front of everyone.  I was scared if others think I am a fool! Yes, I was at a friends church, they were talking about my religion, I didn’t speak up because 25-1 isn’t a very good argument! Yes, People are always trying to groups all of us HUMAN BEINGS into different groups based on religious, political, and moral beliefs.  We are all humans despite the above mentioned differences and we need to learn to come together as a species if we want to advance. Yes, a friend of mine was raped.  She asked me not to say anything so I didn’t. Yes, but refrain myself.  It could endanger my present progress I bite my lip, they were in higher power than my self involved.  (they had a way with words).  I never realized affirmative action made such a difference.  Since its removal its like people you knew and thought you could trust—turned on you—showed you a different side.  It was very negative!  Affirmative Action was a gift that should have never been taken away!  There should never be a difference with any of us since there is…Bring it back…Some people really need to be governed by laws! Yes, It seems as though our classes and professors have their views on different opinions and if we don’t agree with how they feel than we are made to feel misplaced.  If we have a gay professor, we still should be able to disagree without being penalized because I believe in the Bible.  LOVE the person, hate the Sin! Yes, the racial tensions within our community are what keeps us ‘stuck’ in the position we are. The division is here at eh U of M also and there should be more discussion to bring us together. Yes, I have disagreed with someone that said something that was offensive to myself & others.  I didn’t say anything because I didn’t want to be offensive too.  I was very regretful & since have tried to be more supportive. Yes, I have.  A little kid on y street was getting beat up but I didn’t say anything to stop it, I felt really bad.—Delrick Norris I feel that spring break should be at a later time with all the other institutions.  When I was a little kid, I remember seeing that some big kids were being mean and beating up on a little nerdy kid. I felt that I should tell them to stop it, but I was too afraid.  They were bigger, and would’ve been mean to me too.  (I was something of a wimp.) (But no longer!)—Laura Friesen-Lynn Yes, there are many times when I actually speak this matter but there was some kind of trouble all the time.  I never wanted to hurt anyone!—HP Yes, I wanted to talk about how the student groups don’t work together.  I didn’t feel free to talk about it because I thought that I would look like a problem starter J–Ta’nesa Blakely Intimidation & condescending attitudes create very quiet timid people. Yes, today the University Bookstore treated me like dirt.  However I could not do anything about it because we were bothe doing wrong. Yes, because I believe that we should respect our elders and causing them too much grief is disrespectful. Si, me paso la otra vezcuondo estaba en clase y uno de los conpaneros del salon empezo hacer biomas y shistes con conotaciones racioles pero en luger de constdle con educacion le conteste con grocenos y no cree spe ni el ni yo hicimos bien. Yes, it happens everyday at work.  Being a hard and consistent worker always doesn’t pay off like people say.  People take advantage of the good worker when someone less qualified or of a different skin color does the same job for the same pay—JF No, I am one that always speaks my mind & expressed my opinion.  Unless I’m offending somebody or infringing on their right.—Rana Yes, this is something that happens in everyone’s lives whether it be at school, work, or our personal lives.  Yes, it seems like whenever I want to say something I feel that people are watching me are not going to be taking my message seriously.  Because of the different looks I possess. Yes, it happens probably everyday.  Either at work, school, and every day activities.  In school, about taking religion out of school and I guess I am afraid to speak due to humiliation or get ridiculed by society for stickling up in what I believe in.  I have always had strong opinions & support women’s rights.  It is difficult to sit back & not say anything or stand up for what you believe in I was around a group of guys taking about sports & how guys are superior. I have it was another discourse on freedom of speech and how offensive it can some time s be.  I had been attacked racially, and although I felt terrible, I said nothing—mostly because I was intimidated quite easily, and others were speaking up better than I could.  

I agree with Kristi ,and I must say, I too am proud of our campus.  It was wonderful to have so many faculty, students, and staff involved with the Voice Wall last week.  Dr. Laube had a great idea with the Voice Wall and it was refreshing to know that so many were interested in helping to pull this important event together and so many others wanted to have their voices heard. Thanks for your particiaption, your interest, and your honest answers.  I look forward to reading all of the responses to questions 1-6.  Peace to all…

I will be the first to say that I have accused our campus as being apathetic. I am now sure that there has never been a day, since I began attending 2 years ago, that I was more proud than the day we held the first “Freedom of Speech Wall” and I witnessed the outpouring of energy and commitment from my fellow students.  The following are only from the first question with subsequent Q&A to follow.  Please read, enjoy and comment.  We should all be proud of our selves for having the courage to exercise our Constitutional right to “Free Speech”!

Kristi Bartholomew 

“Has there ever been a time when someone else’s speech made you uncomfortable? Do you believe, nevertheless, that they had the right to say it?

This is what you had to say:

  “Of course, it happens every day.  I could not imagine a world without uncomfortable opinions because without such experiences, I would never know how others think; therefore, I would never evolve as a person.” “Today is the five year anniversary of the beginning of the war in Iraq.  Think about how unusual in the world it is to have some of us vocally support the war, some of us distressed by the war and be able to say so and everything allowed in between…Even Apathy….We need to put a high value on what we just automatically accept as our right.” “Speech in regard to the war in Iraq can make me cringe!…especially when I believe lies are being told.  But…I listen…trying to keep an open mind… then make up my own mind.  It is important in our democracy to honor, keep, and protect our right to Freedom of Speech.” “Everyone has the right to speak even if the truth hurts like a dagger in the heart.  Once they start saying truth, things start getting different.” “Every one has the right to speak, even if it hurts.  Mot every one needs to listen and those who speak must be willing to let those who think differently freely speak as well.” “Everyone has the right to free speech, no matter what it is that they say, or the message behind it.  However, it is important to take into consideration other people’s feelings.” “Yes and yes, everyone has the right to say what is on their mind.” “Of course dissenting opinions cause discomfort-however-it is essential to have the right to speak.  People use shock tactics to make their voice louder-but that doesn’t necessarily mean it is more correct.  Without causing undue harm to unwilling listeners everyone has the right to free speech.” “Yes, I grew up in a predominantly white community with very racial tendencies.  As a white male, I was ashamed that these views were still held today.  I’m glad people can voice their opinions so that the issues can be addressed.” “Yes, there have been times someone else says something that makes me uncomfortable.  Nevertheless, it is their right!” “It is time to come together as Americans!”“I think so too!!” “There are times when all of us are offended by comments from another person.  Technically, sure, people have the right to day what ever they like… but only to the point where speech becomes a threat to the rights of others.  Is the right to speak freely more important than the right to be discriminated against? No.” “Making fun of one’s religion leads to an uncomfortable and unwelcoming environment.  This occurred at a get-to-gether I attended last summer.  Although her remarks were uncalled for and formed an awkward situation—she had the right to day it.”“Yes-there has been times when I have been offended by what others have said.  But whether or not I agree with them we have the right to free speech and opinions.” “If somebody’s speech made you feel uncomfortable, yes indeed it should be addressed.  Holding in “inner feelings” makes the problem worst.  Some things mentioned in speeches cause people to respond and interact.” “Yes.  There have been times when I felt uncomfortable from someone else’s speech.  But, nevertheless, everyone has the right to freedom of speech, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion.” “Yes, there has been a time, as I believe everyone has had one.  In most cases they had the right to say that, and all I could do is bite my tongue.” “Yes, there have been plenty of times when I was uncomfortable with the speeches of others.  However, although we do have freedom of speech, I believe it is up to the “intaker” of the speech to keep a strong mind no matter the speech given.—Shavonne D.B. – Miranda.” “Sometimes the vehemence of someone’s speech makes me concerned that it is really designed to incite dangerous acts.” “Free speech is very important, but we should respect the rights of others.” “Yes, there have been a lot of times when people have spoken about something that I was uncomfortable with or I disagreed with.  Nevertheless, I believe they were able to voice their own opinion.” “Of course, there are many times what others say that has made me uncomfortable.  But the type of person I am, I just brush it off.  I’m 22 now, and I can remember way back in the 4th grade when a white girl told me she wished blacks would just “Go back to slavery.”  Even at such a young age, I can remember believing that she couldn’t have thought that on her own; adult influences.  People can be just that ignorant.  I called it a learned prejudice! LOL—Shannen Hawkins” “There has been many times when someone else talks or made comments that was not right.  But they have the right to say it.  They should just consider others.-Denise.” “I have felt uncomfortable after someone said something, But I knew that the person didn’t say it to purposely to harm me. It’s not what you say but rather how you say it.”-Shebra Moore. “Yes, However, I have learned to agree to disagree. Information is progressive and despite personal feelings/perspectives you do learn!”-T. Day “This is the year to elect the President of the United States; therefore, many speeches are being made.  It is very uncomfortable to hear Clergy lash out on racial issues and set precedents.  Free Speech should always be given, but if you are an influential person you have to be careful of what you say and when!” “Yes, everyone has the right to say what they want, long as they grant me the same!” – M. Peters “Free speech is very important, but we should respect the rights of others.” “Yes, there have been lots of times when I felt uncomfortable, but I had to try to look at it from their perspective.  Sometimes I changed my mind, but not always.  I think you have a right to say anything, but you also have the responsibility to be courteous and respectful of others beliefs and feelings.” “I think everyone has the right to say what they feel needs to be said…maturity comes in when we an stick around and through the rebuttal!” “Yes, their speech made ne very uncomfortable because I come from a conservative Christian family and they were from Islam.  That day changed my life forever, because I realized I had everything all wrong.  They had every right.” “I have heard many speeches that made me feel uncomfortable, but it was the person’s right to say it.  However, I feel that one should only speak out if they are willing to hear something equally offensive come back at them with out getting angry!” “Who hasn’t been offended on occasion by someone’s speech?  That’s the price of living as a free citizen in a free country.  Trying to censor speech or writing because it makes someone “uncomfortable” is unworthy of a free people.  Sadly, many have become sensitive to the point of intolerance of dissenting views.  People need to develop thicker skins.”—Paul Streby “Yes, there have been times when certain people have said things regarding my race that have made me uncomfortable.  They did have the right to, because of freedom of speech, but I feel as though they should of respected me enough not to say it!!!” “Whether one agrees or not—people can say whatever they want.” “Yes, they had the right to say what they said.  Everyone has a right to speak what they feel.  If it was offensive to someone it is nor really that person who was at fault, it was uncomfortable to you…” “Many a time!  But it helped to understand how others felt about certain issues and understanding that leads me to believe that conflicts can be resolved.  Dialogue and discussion are key to information.” ‘Yes, I have been uncomfortable- but I do believe that they have the right to say it.  I think those who are more open-minded and understanding should stand-up and speak out more so that hate speech is ultimately drowned our and proven wrong.”  “There are several times when someone else’s speech has made me feel uncomfortable, but I believe they had the right to say what they said because in this country we have freedom of speech.” “Yes, and because I want my opinion out there and everyone should have that RIGHT.” “Anyone can claim free speech, but people should respect each others.” “I was uncomfortable when a student wrote a derogatory article in the M-Times, directing hate at Muslims and slandering them.  It should not have been published.” “Yes, hate speech regarding my ethnicity and religion. No, they shouldn’t have said that because there is something called respect and acceptance.” “Yes…especially when hate speech is involved, regardless of who is spewing it!” “Yes, We speech too much about racism!  It’s ridiculous.” “As an international student it is hard for me to understand racist attitudes.  I believe that in this time of human evolution this movement shouldn’t exist!  And yes, it made me feel uncomfortable and unhappy.  This is supposed to be the land of the freedom, but every person has different Future!  It is good to know that there are also good people. Gracias!” “Yes. It is their right, their freedom of speech to say what they want just have some respect or concern for other peoples feelings.” “There are often times others speech makes me uncomfortable yet I believe everyone is entitled to voice their opinion.  However, I feel they should do so in a respectful manner.” “Absolutely!  I’m Glad they have the right to say it, just like I have the right to disagree with them.”  –Sara McDonnell “Yes, I believe that people should have “freedom of speech.”  However, in order to truly have a freedom you must be willing to forego that freedom.”—Margo Kincaid “Everyone has a right to free speech.  In fact, it is one of the main things this country was founded upon.  However, everyone has a right to equality and individuality.  I was hurt by the biases behind the “Affirmative Action Bake Sale” because I felt the argument the organization was ignorant, incorrect, and hurtful to others.  Speak Freely, but do not harm others in the process.”– Jessica Anthony “There have been many instances in classes that I have been very uncomfortable and offended by other people’s comments.  However, I believe that it is essential to education.  They most definitely have the right to say it.  Free speech is free speech, regardless of whether or not you are going to offend someone.  You always will!”  “Yes, you can always give an argument to counter it” “I do remember a time.  But the mere fact of the delivery showed that the person was ignorant.  Consequently, the person really flet stupid when I just smiled and walked away.  A smile always casts out evil.”—Matty “Yes, all the time in certain classes, teachers say things about the African American race that they don’t know about.  It makes me feel uncomfortable, but I always make sure I correct them.”—Drew Scott “Yes, while it was offensive to me it was their right as citizens of the USA to speak freely their thoughts.  I did not agree, I was highly offended, but that’s life and I sued my right to free speech to say what I felt as well.” B. Muse “Yes, but it’s just because Nick Dean is a bastard!…really, everyone is entitled to freedom of speech, but to an extent.” “I approve this comment-Nick Dean.  Also, don’t believe everything you hear.”-ND “No, but if it did happen to me I then they would have had the right because it is their opinion to talk about it.”—Franklin “Of course people say things that I may not agree with at all that make me uncomfortable, but I’m sure the cane can be said of me as well and I love the fact that I can express my thoughts and beliefs.”—Tim “No, but there have been times when I’ve offended others with my atheistic preaching’s.  GOD BLESS AMERICA!” “Absolutely!!  The only way we can overcome destructive, alienating beliefs, behaviors, and actions towards each other is to be able to speak truth, especially uncomfortable truth.  Speaking behind closed doors or saying what we are “supposed” to say while believing something else only fuels anger and hatred, but never addresses it.  We must all say what is in our hearts openly and truthfully even if it speaks against prevailing sentiments.”  Brian Welch  “Yes, but regardless they had every right to say it.” Alex “I believe that people have taken freedom of speech to a whole new level.  Antitacution is an abomination to our society because it is stereotyping a group of people.  People should be more sensitive to people’s backgrounds and culture.”—Lielte “I believe that free speech is what helps people understand others.”—M “Free speech in newspapers usually makes me uncomfortable because they associate terrible things with Islam.  It makes people think I am a part of it.  They still have a right to say it.  I just hope they are more considerate.” “I believe in the right to free speech; however they must be respectful, to the other party.  Mo attacking statement should be made.” “When people’s belief or views that they speak about are selfish, hateful, or simply contradicting to my own beliefs, I feel the need to defend myself and others.  Everyone has freedom to speak so long as they have a mouth really.” “Now in these days, no jobs, economy is going down, so please help us to survive.” “I think we all have.  But the world we live in is full of uncomfortable moments and situations…and it will continue to be.  We all deserve to have the freedom of speech… because our speech defines us.” “I think now a days US economy is demolish so youth of people aware that things are dangerous for future.  P/z evacuate the youth from home and be sincere related to job opportunity.”  “At my high school graduation, our guest speaker had said some very racist comments that offended me.  He didn’t realize that not all of the graduating was black.  I feel that he had the right to his opinion, but it was not appropriate for him to say what he said.” Sometimes.  Depends on the topic in hand—if it concerns people and they get a positive response they like it, but if not… well u know!!!” “Of course, a lot of the time when our beliefs don’t coincide with other beliefs we feel uncomfortable.  Even so we still have a right to say those things, but I believe we need to say those things in love so as not to purposefully hurt anyone.” “Swearing makes me highly uncomfortable.  The tongue is powerful and should be used w/care even if it’s our right.”  “On far more than one occasion.  We were forced to listen to a political party speech in a class yesterday and I felt very much in the minority.  I feel that people should have freedom of speech.  I also feel that people should have the freedom to leave when tension occurs, something I did not have.” “Occasionally, Yes.  I definitely am down with the free speech.  LOL!!!one!!!  But I’m not down with the unnecessary put-downs people throw around.  When people tell me I am not the Hottness!!!one !1!!!, I can deal, but discrimination and bigotry and the like, I’m completely against!”  

(What’s your take!?) 

2 political groups at MSU allege intimidation

Conservatives say probe is targeting their viewpoints
(From LSJ.COM) 

Matthew Miller
Lansing State Journal

EAST LANSING - Conservative groups at Michigan State University, under investigation for months for alleged violations of the university’s anti-discrimination policy, have begun to question whether that investigation has political motivations.

“It’s an act of intimidation, pure and simple,” said William Allen, a professor of political science and the faculty adviser to the MSU chapter of the Young Americans for Freedom.

“Whether this is somehow a political hatchet job to get back at people who they might sort of blame for the imposition of the new regime in the state of Michigan, we don’t know,” he said, referring to his public support for Proposal 2, the 2006 constitutional amendment banning affirmative action. “But it’s certainly reasonable to speculate about.”

University officials would not comment publicly on the investigation.

But Terry Denbow, MSU’s vice president for university relations, said speculation such as Allen’s was “baseless,” and that the university would not target a group or individual for their political views.

“We would find it abhorrent if anybody did that,” he said.

“That is not going on, and, if it was, it wouldn’t be tolerated by (President) Lou Anna Simon, (Provost) Kim Wilcox and others.”

The investigation, which is being conducted by MSU’s Office for Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives, also is focusing on the MSU College Republicans and the group’s adviser, journalism professor Fred Fico.

It primarily concerns the events at an on-campus talk in April by Chris Simcox, co-founder of the anti-illegal immigration group, the Minutemen.

Protesters disrupted that talk, shouting and pounding on chairs, preventing Simcox from speaking for 20 minutes.

MSU police cleared most of them from the room, arresting five.

Three were issued misdemeanor tickets, two charged with felonies, though both later pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges only.

An Oct. 4 letter sent by the Office for Inclusion says that “a number of students” had filed complaint