Home -> Law Blog Directory -> International Law Blogs -> Cearta
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
International Law
: CeartaAnother heckers? veto; another failure of freedom of expression on campus
By Eoin
Via 9th Level Ireland, I am alerted to the following story [with added links]:
Euthanasia lecture cancelled
A controversial public lecture on euthanasia has been cancelled minutes after it began when a group of over 20 protestors disrupted it. The guest speaker Prof Len Doyal, an open proponent of both voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia, had to be escorted from the lecture theatre at Cork University Hospital by security staff. The lecture entitled ‘Why Euthanasia should be legalised‘, formed part of the annual spring series organized by CUH’s Ethics Forum and started at 5pm. As the 350 attendees were being welcomed, a group of over 20 people stood up and began shouting. Witnesses say some began saying the rosary and one man accused Prof Doyal of being a murderer. A decision was taken soon afterwards to cancel the lecture on public safety grounds but it took some time to get the message through to the audience because of the continuing strong vocal opposition by protestors. …
This is terrible news. As I have argued here before, to ensure that heckers do not have a veto, those who organise such controversial events must ensure that the controversial speakers actually have the opportunity to speak. Unsurprisingly, the lecture has been a source of controversy for quite some time, so the organisers’ failure to make appropriate arrangements is almost as culpable as the hecklers’ veto. Cary Nelson, President of the American Association of University Professors, explains why controversial speakers, even monsters, should be able to speak on campus. He begins with an invitation to George Lincoln Rockwell, to speak at Antioch when Nelson was a student there.
Monsters With Constituencies
… It was a chance to see firsthand a monster with a constituency, albeit a relatively small one. College audiences have special reason to see such people in the flesh, so as to try to understand how they might draw people to their cause. Monsters, as it happens, also have a way of showing their true colors, as Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad did at Columbia University. His ludicrous assertion that there are no homosexuals in Iran did more to discredit him as a competent leader than almost anything one might say about him.
The notion of a monster … suggests … that students who want to understand their culture might benefit from exposure to both its angels and its devils, along with those not so readily classifiable. What one learns can be surprising. …
The American Association of University Professors has repeatedly argued that an invitation is not an endorsement. So far as I remember, no one was silly enough to make the counter claim about the Rockwell invitation. Nor was it necessary for Columbia’s president Bollinger to go to such embarrassing lengths to distance himself from Ahmadinejad. No one thought Columbia was promoting him for the Nobel Peace prize.
… The new weapon of choice [to get a speech canceled] is the anonymous threat of violence delivered by a phone call from a public booth. Then the president or his spokesperson can cancel a speech in a voice filled with regret, ceremoniously invoking “security” concerns … It is the ultimate heckler’s veto. Place a call and you are in charge. Better yet, call the threat in to a talk show host and give his hate campaign a newspaper headline.
We either must stand firm against these efforts to undermine the integrity of our educational institutions or agree that academic freedom no longer obtains … the campus as a whole must bear the cost of assuring that invitations are not withdrawn. If a threat requires extra security, let the campus itself — not the students or faculty who issued the invitation — cover the cost. That is the price of retaining academic freedom for a free society.
That last line is worth repeating: ensuring controversial speech on campus is the price of retaining academic freedom for a free society. It is a price we must be prepared to pay.
Full post as published by Cearta on April 09, 2009 (boomark / email).
Pet Food Recall and Deaths
Dogs and Cats Sickened by Tainted Menu Food Products
US Army Helicopter Crashes On Campus
1 Crew Member dies
Religious Decorations
Oklahoma City to pay attorney fees in religious freedom violations lawsuit.
Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Alarm Failure
Trasylol
allegedly causing kidney and heart failure.
Hip & Knee Replacement
alleging sterilization practices can cause implant failure.
Tarceva
Safety Data Show Association with Liver Failure and Death

Against Freedom of Commercial Expression - Abstract
Revoke the Defamation Regulation in the Indonesian Criminal Law !
Canadian Constitutional Law #29: Freedom of Expression
Thawed but Still Chilled: Freedom of Expression in the Aftermath of Simpson v. Mair
US Congress Cites Free Expression as Reason ICANN Must Remain Controlled by US Govt.
The Breadth of Our Freedom of Expression







