2008 Woodie Awards
SectionsFree speech advocate dissapointed by protest
Ryan Cooper
Issue date: 11/2/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
This isn't what I fought for.
Four years ago, I sued the Missouri State Board of Governors in federal court.
In the lawsuit, I sought redress for restrictions imposed by a campus administrator on myself and other group members during the 2003 new student festival. While handing out copies of our publication, we were exiled to the free speech zone, away from other students. We were threatened with police removal if we moved away from the small square.
Missouri State used to have one of the most restrictive speech policies in the country. Without prior permission, students were not allowed to demonstrate, hold press conferences or use amplification equipment. The Bear Paw was the only location for any approved outdoor events.
My lawsuit changed that. My lawyer, Kevin Theriot, rewrote the campus speech policies into the current Expressive Activity Policy.
Students now have the same rights as other citizens. As long as a free speech activity doesn't interfere with classroom activities, it's allowed.
Former President John Keiser made the bold statement that students would "take over the administration building" if given free speech rights. That never happened. Campus opponents of free speech said that students would abuse this freedom and cause incivility. That hasn't happened - until last week.
Students upset with campus security for censoring a musical performance protested at the Bear Paw. They chanted the F-word and held signs using the same profanity.
Rational human beings don't behave like animals. This protest was nothing more than an attempt at publicity and notoriety, which they received.
Their efforts will not increase free speech on campus. The opposite will most likely occur. Offended students and Greenwood lab parents will urge administrators to restrict free speech. Old policy restrictions will be re-implemented.
The best medicine in this situation would have been restraint. Students and staff shouldn't overreact to things said at the Bear Paw.
Four years ago, I sued the Missouri State Board of Governors in federal court.
In the lawsuit, I sought redress for restrictions imposed by a campus administrator on myself and other group members during the 2003 new student festival. While handing out copies of our publication, we were exiled to the free speech zone, away from other students. We were threatened with police removal if we moved away from the small square.
Missouri State used to have one of the most restrictive speech policies in the country. Without prior permission, students were not allowed to demonstrate, hold press conferences or use amplification equipment. The Bear Paw was the only location for any approved outdoor events.
My lawsuit changed that. My lawyer, Kevin Theriot, rewrote the campus speech policies into the current Expressive Activity Policy.
Students now have the same rights as other citizens. As long as a free speech activity doesn't interfere with classroom activities, it's allowed.
Former President John Keiser made the bold statement that students would "take over the administration building" if given free speech rights. That never happened. Campus opponents of free speech said that students would abuse this freedom and cause incivility. That hasn't happened - until last week.
Students upset with campus security for censoring a musical performance protested at the Bear Paw. They chanted the F-word and held signs using the same profanity.
Rational human beings don't behave like animals. This protest was nothing more than an attempt at publicity and notoriety, which they received.
Their efforts will not increase free speech on campus. The opposite will most likely occur. Offended students and Greenwood lab parents will urge administrators to restrict free speech. Old policy restrictions will be re-implemented.
The best medicine in this situation would have been restraint. Students and staff shouldn't overreact to things said at the Bear Paw.
Viewing Comments 1 - 5 of 5
Rob Lehr
posted 11/01/07 @ 10:45 PM CST
Mr. Cooper,
Bigala was represented in the protest, they had atleast five members present that I am sure of. They were strong supporters of what we did as far as I could tell and I hope that they comment on this article to reiterate my point. (Continued…)
Chuck Lauer
posted 11/01/07 @ 11:13 PM CST
BiGALA members were represented. Not BiGALA. The protest was not a BiGALA event; individual members are free to support or not support any event or cause they wish. (Continued…)
Rob Lehr
posted 11/02/07 @ 1:50 PM CST
Thank you for your post Chuck, I hope that my comment did not make any claim that was not true, but it appears we are saying essentially the same thing. (Continued…)
JT Eberhard
posted 11/03/07 @ 12:47 PM CST
I have a guest column submitted to the Standard for it's next issue addressing Mr. Cooper's letter. You can find it on my facebook if you're impatient. (Continued…)
Megan Marsh
posted 11/04/07 @ 2:23 AM CST
Mr. Cooper, because of free speech, you have the right to write this article and state your opinion, and by the same token, I have the right to comment and do the same as well. (Continued…)
Post a Comment