Freedom Of Speech Under Fire

The first amendment right to freedom of speech forbids the “prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press”.  Make no mistake:  all Americans are entitled to free speech on any topic of their choice.  It must be acknowledged, however, that there is a thin line between freedom of speech and harassment when individuals are targeted and action follows words.  Ill-received opinions are often disputed to determine whether the assertion qualifies as an embodiment of free speech, or a convenient defense for hateful and defamatory behavior.

Destinie Mogg-Barkalow, a student writer for The Comment at Bridgewater State University, has been the center of media coverage in recent weeks after she was attacked on campus for the opinions she stated in her article, “Prop 8 generates more hate”.  The article was published in the student newspaper on February 15, 2012 and was followed by a throng of reactions.  Mogg-Barkalow was confronted on campus by individuals suspected to be students.  According to reports, two individuals approached her in a parking lot and asked if she had written the article.  She was struck in the face when she confirmed she was the author. This physical retaliation to her article is a troubling reaction to an expression of free speech.

In the article, Mogg-Barkalow discusses the flaws of the state of California’s Proposition 8, which legally restricted marriage to include a man and a woman.  Proposition 8 was declared unconstitutional by a federal appeals panel on February 7, thus restoring the right to same sex marriage in California.  Mogg-Barkalow’s commentary dictates her passionate defense of marriage equality rights and refers to the overturned legislation as “a load of religious bigotry”.  The direction of the article indicates an infringement of rights that extends beyond marriage equality to a condemnation of a lifestyle.  The attack was in clear defiance to her opinion.

In addition to an outcry of support and continued press regarding same sex marriage rights, the publication of “letter to the editor” responses in The Comment have also spawned criticism regarding the supervision of publication in the student newspaper.  The discretion executed by the faculty advisor, David Copeland, has been questioned, suggesting that the certain comments should not have been published.  The suggested regulation of student opinions based on the negative reception of strong student beliefs is of grave concern to community members invested in true journalism.  In 1969, the Supreme Court ruled that “students do not shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate”.  This confirms that Mogg-Barkalow has the same right to state her opinion that other students – and any American for that matter – have to respond with their thoughts.  The suggestion that student comments should be censored challenges the intent of the first amendment.  The role of a student newspaper is to report student news, which includes student opinion articles and responses.   The first amendment protects this expression, doesn’t it?