What Happened to the First Amendment?

Our First Amendment right to free speech is under assault on many college and university campuses around the country. Under the guise of protecting students, the freedom to express views not deemed acceptable to an intolerant, judgmental elite is being attacked and denounced by students, professors and, in many cases, administrators.

Protection from what? Safely ensconced in the artificial, surreal atmosphere of the campus, far away from the harsh realities of life, buttressed by the excessive financial beneficence of hard-working American taxpayers, these close-minded liberals have the intellectual arrogance to think they should decide for all of us which ideas are to be heard and which are not. This reeks of totalitarianism, which always creeps in gradually until it takes root in a country. In the Road to Serfdom, Friedrich Hayek describes how the threat of totalitarianism in Europe in the 1930s was foreshadowed by society “moving away from the basic ideas on which European civilization has been built” and how the post-war welfare state, like what we see on campuses today, “extinguishes and stupefies a people.” We have all lived this sad reality before, which took World War II and then the Cold War to dismiss.

Modern day American colleges contradict the original concept of what a university should be. From their medieval beginnings, universities were venues for promoting free exchange and rigorous debate of ideas. In fact, the idea of academic freedom originated in the 12th century, when the Constitutio Habita established the University of Bologna as an institution where research could be conducted independently.

The example set by the University of Bologna spread throughout Europe, and contributed to the development of many ideas by influential people who could freely discuss controversial new theories and concepts. Without the protections of academic freedom in these early institutions, we may not have benefitted from great minds, such as Copernicus and Galileo. Today’s generation of great young minds like these could be stifled and sabotaged if radicals continue silencing ideas they don’t agree with.

Colleges use different methods to suppress free speech. One such example is “free speech zones” on campus, the mere idea of which is incomprehensible in the United States. These zones are specifically delineated areas on a campus where “free speech” is allowed, which of course turns the words “free speech” into an oxymoron. This transforms an absolute truth, a right guaranteed under the Constitution, into a negotiable, transient morsel of policy. I wonder which of our constitutional liberties will be next.

In an ironic case at Kellogg Community College in Michigan, students were arrested for handing out copies of the United States Constitution without the administration’s permission. How incredible is this? In their greatest hopes, Marx and Lenin couldn’t have been bold enough to conceive this.

Cancellation of conservative speakers and events on campus has become another method for constraining freedom. Following protests and sometimes riotous behavior by scripted, biased students and faculty, many administrators and Boards of Trustees seem to prefer acquiescence and political correctness to confrontation, willing to accept the connected erosion of freedom.

In 2014, protests by leftist students at Rutgers caused former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to cancel a commencement speech. Secretary Rice is an individual with a life story of persistence and achievement like none other, and she epitomizes the American Dream. This year, violent student riots at the University of California-Berkeley caused the school to cancel a speech by prominent conservative Ann Coulter. So much for colleges fostering an environment for free debate and expression.

Further, many college professors seek to indoctrinate and discourage free debate in classes, leading to groupthink- the phenomenon where the desire for conformity replaces rational thought. Conservative opinions are routinely suppressed in the classroom, and many students hesitate to voice their thoughts in fear of failing assignments. Studies by the Higher Education Research Institute show that the percentage of self-identifying liberal professors has grown since the 1990s. In 2014, their research showed that 60 percent of college professors identified as liberal, 30 percent as moderate and only 10 percent as conservative. This lack of ideological diversity in academia undermines the free exchange of ideas and turns the classroom into a propaganda machine. No wonder so much has been written and discussed about the lack of critical thinking skills in younger Americans.

Colleges and universities that refuse to respect and enforce our laws and Constitution should not be subsidized by United States taxpayers. If schools want to go it alone, free of taxpayer money, they can and should say and do what they want, but if these institutions expect government funds, at a minimum they should be required to follow the Constitution, by which all citizens are expected to abide.

Not all colleges have succumbed to political correctness. In 2015, Purdue University President Mitch Daniels wrote clearly and courageously about the need to protect academic freedom and individual liberty on campus. In 2016, John Ellison, dean of students at the University of Chicago, sent an email to incoming freshman defending academic freedom and free speech while denouncing the politically correct invention of “safe spaces.” More institutions of higher education should follow the lead of Purdue and Chicago instead of Berkeley and Rutgers.

The real world doesn’t recognize “safe spaces.” Colleges and universities that promote them are committing educational malpractice, failing to prepare students for life beyond the cocoon of campus. Higher education should be a platform for the peaceful exchange and debate of ideas, where learning occurs from having one’s beliefs challenged and having to defend them. This is what the original university was all about. In so doing, the American ideals embodied in the Bill of Rights will be championed, not compromised. We will gain a generation of graduates who can think critically, accept differences of opinions, and assure that our hard-earned freedoms are cherished and nurtured in America.

The first Amendment is being redefined by the Progressives and Flaming Liberals
to prevent any opposing opinion,
which requires any thought !
Can you imagine how these "snowflakes " are going to adjust when they make it out the the cruel world of their parents basement.
Academic Common Core program is just the beginning of 'group think', where precision and calculated thought is considered confrontational
and where mediocrity is celebrated based on sensitivity "feelings".

>>Seemingly the First Amendment only applies is you are championing queers, perverts, illegals and Muslims if you are not extolling the goodness of these people then you are a racist and a bigot

... and you are to be SILENCED!!

When you can’t win in the marketplace of ideas simply clear the market of any ideas that differ from yours.

Colleges began the full assault on the 1st amendment back in 1966. If you were in the military back then you know full well of which I speak. Over the years it increasingly advanced until the majority of colleges are almost totally against anything that causes them self-discipline and obedience to any rules or laws of society...much worse...our original rights under the Constitution.

Back then the “if it feels good...do it” mentality infected the american society. The trend continues to this day and the liberal society has reproduced (both children and their liberal attitudes) to the point that we are now watching the beginning of the end of the America we once knew.

There is no turning it around since the liberal population triples itself in size every 18 years. In a lot of cases every 15 years. The size of the children you produce has no bearing upon income or the ability to support them for the government will do that for you.

This Presidential 4 years will be our last gasp at saving our American way of life and if it fails, I am satisfied that my children have all passed away and will not have to suffer what is to come.

Only unpopular speech needs the protection of the First Amendment. But the reality is, that today’s “popular” notions might become the anathema of tomorrow, driven to excommunication, resulting in a sudden reversal of the relative “popularity” of a given point of view.

But even heretics can have a solid basis for their beliefs.

To the left, the First Amendment protects desecrating Christian and Jewish symbols. It protects pornography and violent “entertainment” - especially when children are exposed to it. It protects communists and Islamists when they incite violence or conspire to commit terrorism. It does not apply to you when you advocate freedom or criticize Marxism or Islamism.

In 1962 the Supreme Court in Engel v. Vitale decreed that Materialism was our official state religion and that the establishment clause was meant to protect people from religious views to which they might object, as opposed to the protecting the right of people to hold religious views that some might regard as objectionable.

It has taken a number of years for this judicial philosophy to be applied to the free speech clauses of the ammendmant but thanks to the work of "progressives" on university campuses we may soon see the court decree that people have the right to not be exposed to political opinions with which they do not agree. It's a natural progression don't you see.

It's not just speech. The 1st has many parts

Congress shall make no law
1) respecting an establishment of religion - Dems and the courts love it an apply it as broadly as possible ,
2) or prohibiting the free exercise thereof - Dems and courts pretend this doesn't exist;
3) or abridging the freedom of speech - unless it causes someone distress. We've gone way beyond the "fire in a theater" standard of harm,
4) or of the press; - "the press" consists of organizations they agree with - not bloggers or independent investigators if those is charge (Dems) choose not to give press credentials. CNN can say anything - O'Keefe should go to jail after being sued for everything he owns.
4) or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, - To paraphrase Bill, it depends on what the definition or "peaceably" is. The D definition depends on who is assembling. And Rs don't want us to assemble online without them being able to snoop on our communications.
5) and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances - Only minorities can have grievances. Sit down and shut up if you benefit from white privilege.

If Hillsdale College can be refused government backed loans and grants for refusing to kowtow to some hideous government edict (affirmative action, I believe?), then why can’t the government under Trump refuse to allow those same grants and backed-loans to places of higher education that refuse to allow free speech?

‘Can you imagine how these “snowflakes “ are going to adjust when they make it out the the cruel world of their parents basement.’

not so sure the world outside the basement is all that harsh anymore...corporations are rife with politically correct protocols...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.