Criticism of display based on content isn't legitimate

TO THE EDITOR:

A major criticism of liberal college campuses" including UNC is that free speech is encouraged" as long as it coincides with contemporary liberal ideals.

The response to the pro-life pictures perfectly supports this assertion. To everyone that found the pictures inappropriate and offensive: if similarly graphic pictures were used to support a cause you support would you condemn them as a ""tasteless gimmick?"" If graphic pictures were used to discourage inhumane treatment of animals or the genocide in Darfur" would such a display be condemned or praised? I have often heard that as a prerequisite to consuming meat people should see how the animals that they will eat are treated and killed. Is this not applicable to abortion?

Although I will be the first to agree that both groups definitely crossed the line as they became intolerant enough to question the opposition's inalienable liberty of holding any dissenting view it seemed that as a whole the display worked to foster healthy debate and dissemination of ideas.

I implore everyone to always keep in mind that in the United State free speech is a right extended to everyone even someone you disagree with. And by the way I'm pro-choice.



Caleb Thompson

First-Year

Contemporary European Studies

Political Science