Editorial: Nonie Darwish and free campus discourse

Free speech is vital to healthy campus discourse, and Darwish’s visit to the University, though controversial, was entirely appropriate. There is inherent value in allowing students to invite whomever they choose to speak on campus. Moreover, inviting certain speakers does not signify an endorsement of their views. To determine the relative merits of differing opinions and views, there must be free and open debate. This is impossible unless even the most unorthodox perspectives are heard. To screen speakers based on the relative controversy of their views would harm the open discourse that the University seeks to foster and protect.

Just as Darwish and other speakers have the right to speak on campus, other groups have the right to protest her appearance. The most productive response to a controversial speaker is for students to voice their specific concerns rather than trying to prevent the speaker from coming to campus. And while hosting a rebuttal speaker in such situations is certainly desirable, it should never be required.

Re-inviting Darwish reaffirmed our community’s dedication to free speech. Though Darwish was originally scheduled to speak last fall, her talk was canceled the night before as sponsors began to question the wisdom of their invitation. In re-inviting her to campus, the sponsoring groups have recognized that open dialogue is more important and ultimately a greater benefit than the cost of offending some.

This University strives to support the free flow of different opinions and beliefs. Even if the views offered by speakers are offensive or controversial, they should still be heard to preserve free speech on campus. A free flow of views allows for healthy debate and discourse, and student groups must continue to be allowed to invite speakers of their choice to the University.