Moral Depravity, Constitutional Ignorance, and the University

by

The headlining story in today’s Diamondback, wholly unsurprisingly, covers the continuing porn brouhaha here on campus. Amusingly, it reads “Students push on with porn: Campus groups to host XXX film in name of free speech.”

At what point did the great contemners of decency become so brazen as openly to contort the purportedly sacrosanct freedom of speech to defend the public showing of xxx-rated pornography, despite a history of Constitutional law that explicitly denies hardcore obscenity the same extensive protection given to less prurient — not to mention wholly unnecessary and anti-communitarian — forms of expression? In the fall semester of the 2007-2008 school year, the Times, in what, sadly, was our only issue of the year, ran a front-page exposé revealing that the alleged noose hanging outside of Stamp and Nyumburu, source of embarrassment and outrage on our hyper-sensitive, politically correct campus, was, in truth a simply Boy Scout knot, the leftover string from a since-removed sign or banner.

How the Left roared in indignation! Such speech — had it in fact been “hate speech,” and not a harmless piece of string — simply could not be tolerated. To what great extent University officials went to assuage the great offended masses, to assure them that this University takes racial diversity and “tolerance” seriously, and would never defend a racist’s right to speak his mind over the right of a student not to be offended.

Now, the Left cries, “Wolf!” suggesting the the state legislature is out of line threatening to cut funding if the showing happens — on a public university campus, no less —, calling it “censorship,” an offense to free speech. What of those of us who find repulsive that students worry more about some spurious notion of free speech than about moral and intellectual cultivation? Those of us who think that certain things belong in the privacy of home or dorm room, and not in a campus theater or lecture hall, who reject the risible claim that charging an admission fee negates the publicly supported nature of a showing of obscene material on a public campus? Some of us just want to attend an ostensible institution of higher education that recognizes that education, though open debate is necessary to it, requires limits, too.

Then again, the Left on campus not only dominates, but is composed of a bunch of intellectually enervated whiners who need to grow up.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , ,

5 Responses to “Moral Depravity, Constitutional Ignorance, and the University”

  1. Porn, Rights, and Higher Education Or, Thank God I’m Gone in Two Months « Nathancontramundi Says:

    […] Porn, Rights, and Higher Education Or, Thank God I’m Gone in Two Months Posted on 6 April 2009 by nathancontramundi The University of Maryland: Our basketball team fails; featuring two socialists, a communist, and left-liberal constitutes intellectual diversity, and we like to show xxx-rated porn on campus. […]

  2. MOriger Says:

    Yup. Leftism is Satan’s ideology and follows the simple formula: take whatever is right and turn it on its head.

  3. findingtherat Says:

    I though you were a libertarian newspaper… In writing this blog post, you forget the principles of the philosophy you represent. Free speech and libertarianism go hand-in-hand. Don’t want to see porn? Don’t go to the showing. If you were a true libertarian newspaper you would support the group that is sponsoring the video’s First Amendment rights. You could then comment on how you personally think showing the movie is indecent. Instead, you attack their right to free speech and push a political agenda that is misaligned with your purported mission. Remind yourself of the principals you say you believe in from time to time. You’ve lost my support. — Libertarian.

  4. findingtherat Says:

    Also, a noose cannot be accurately compared to a porn showing. A noose is a signifier of violence. A noose can be seen as a call to violence given it’s bloody history in this country. A noose is a dangerous symbol of hate. A porn showing is not a symbol of hate. Get a grip on reality. I’m less offended by the porn and more offended by this article. — Libertarian

  5. Nathan P. Origer Says:

    Actually, rat, The Terrapin Times has never claimed, and does not claim, to be a libertarian newspaper. It’s a broadly right-of-centre publication, with points of view ranging from classical liberal to neo-libertarian to anarcho-conservative, with just about every other typology on the block. There’s nothing contradictory in the Times’ Weblog, or the paper itself (May 2009) taking a stand against the showing of the porn.

    This is especially the case because a) the Supreme Court has long rule that hard-core obscenity is not granted the same free-speech protections that other forms of speech are (as my post notes) and b) tax dollars were involved in this attempted showing, and that makes it a much more complex issue than one of “free speech” — and certainly no “First Amendment right” exists here. Thanks, though.

    Also, the point about the “noose” is that it was not, in fact, a noose. There’s nothing offensive, except to the hypersensitive and effete over-reactors, about a knot used to hang a banner.

    Thanks for your super commentary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: