The Help Entry 4: They Give So Much, Yet Receive So Little

          The next few chapters in the book focused a lot on Aibileen. Through the maid’s perspective, I continued to learn a lot about what it was like to be a black maid who worked for a white owner. Although there are some white women who treat their maids decently, there are many who often make the maids’ lives terrible. One of the main characters, Minny, shared some of her experiences she had with her countless rude employers. A lot of the time, the stories showed that these white women took advantage of their maids. They treated them unfairly and made them do things that they would never make a white person do. On example is when Minny shared that Miss. Walter made her pay ten dollars for a crystal glass she accidently broke, white Minny later found out only cost three dollars. It is unfair for a white person to deceive a maid in that way, especially since everyone knows that maids are low on money. She also told Skeeter about a time where her employer made her test out different hair dye colors on her. A little humor is added to this deep novel when Aibileen states about Minny, “Lord, I never seen blue hair on a black woman before or since. Leroy say you look like a cracker from outer space” (227). Even though this comment is funny, the concept behind the comment is clearly wrong. It is unfair that so many employers take advantage of their black maids in order to get what they want. The don’t think about anyone besides themselves, and it does not bother them to insult or hurt their black maids.

            Aibileen continues to share her experiences as a maid in the later chapters. She shows that although it is difficult to work for a white employer, it can also bring happiness into her life. Aibileen is not just a maid who cooks and cleans, but she also takes care of Miss. Leefolt’s daughter, Mae Mobley. Miss. Leefolt is so uninvolved in her three year old daughter’s life that Mae Mobley tells her maid, “Aibee you’re my real mama.” When Aibileen tries to correct her, she insists, “I’m your baby” (285). This part truly shows how involved the maids become in their employers lives. They work all the time and begin to almost become a part of the family. However, the white employers still treat them like an outsider. It surprises me that Aibileen is so good to Miss. Leefolt and her family, yet Miss. Leefolt does not give her the time of day. When Aibileen asks for something, she does not get it, yet Miss. Leefolt expects so much out of her as a maid.

The Help Entry 3: Danger

            As I have read more of The Help, it has become very clear to me that these black maids who are willing to talk to Miss. Skeeter about their experiences are very brave for doing so. They are putting their lives at risk by sharing their stories about white women. At first, it made me angry that so many maids were turning down Skeeter’s offer to be interviewed. I felt as if they weren't thinking straight, because if they truly wanted to make a difference, they had to start somewhere. It seemed to me like that start could come from Skeeter’s book, which was not possible without the participation of these maids. However, after reading one part of the novel, it has become clear as to why these women are so hesitant to talk with Skeeter. On page 255, the maids who have agreed to be interviewed are discussing what may happen to them if they get caught. One maid responds by saying, “My husband cousin…they took her tongue out. For talking to some Washington people about the Klan. You think they gone take our tongues? For talking to you?” It is evident that these black women feel a sense of fear every time they get interviewed by Skeeter. I find it very brave and noble of them to be doing something like this. They are putting their lives in serious danger in order to help make a difference for black maids all across the country. This part really showed me that it takes true strength and bravery in order to stand up for something you believe in and make a difference. I admire these maids, especially Aibileen and Minny, for being able to brush aside their fear in order to do what they believe is right.

            The further I get along in The Help, the more upset I feel towards the way our country used to be. It makes me angry that Americans were so ignorant and selfish back in the 1960s, that they allowed this type of discrimination to happen. One part that stood out to me in these few chapters I just read was when Yule May—a black maid who works for Hilly—got sent to jail for four years. She had two sons who desperately wanted to go to college to get an education, but Yule May did not have enough money to send them, because she wasn’t making enough as a maid. She begged Hilly for a loan and promised that she would may her back; she just needed the money at the time in order for her boys to go to college. However, Hilly turned down her offer, which made Yule May desperate. She stole a semi-expensive ring from Hilly that Hilly never wore or even touched. When Hilly caught her stealing, she brought her to court and fined her, causing Yule May to lose all the money she had saved up. She was only seventy-five dollars short of the tuition money, but after the fine, she had absolutely nothing. Even more upsetting, Skeeter noted that “a regular sentence be six months for petty stealing, but [Hilly] got it pushed up to four years.” It makes me angry that Hilly was so selfish and only thinking about herself, while Yule May really needed the money to help her sons. Instead, Hilly believed that this ring that she never wore was more important that an African American’s college education. It is infuriating that whites were so ignorant and self-centered. It seems like they purposely set out to ruin a black person’s life whenever they got the chance. It is no wonder that blacks always felt a sense of fear as they lived their lives. As I read about more of these circumstances in the book, it makes me wish that there were more people in Mississippi at the time who were like Miss. Skeeter, because she seems to be the only selfless and genuine white woman in this story.  

The Help Entry 2: Equality

   In the next part of The Help, Miss. Skeeter's thoughts and actions help to further demonstrate why she is so determined to publish these interviews with the maids. She tells Minny and Aibileen, "We want to show your perspective...so people might understand what it's like from your side. We--we help it might change some things around here" (164). Miss. Skeeter is doing what people should have done a long time ago. She wants to show the world what horrible things they are doing to black people, and through this, people will be able to recognize that change is needed. I find Skeeter to be a strong and brave women to be doing this. Most people--even if they know discrimination is wrong--will still let it happen because they are too afraid to speak up. The world, especially during this time period, needs more women like Skeeter so that others can recognize the mistakes they are making. The interviews will be a start of change; it will promote equality for everyone.
   Another part that stood out to me was where Miss. Skeeter first saw the list of Jim Crow Laws. She was shocked to read about a twenty-five page book filled with laws that exist solely to separate whites and blacks. She was surprised, because even though she knew about these laws, seeing the long list written out on paper was upsetting and came as a shock. It makes me wonder if more white people took a good long look at this ridiculous long list of laws if maybe they would have recognized how unnecessary they were. For example, one Jim Crow law states that "Books shall not be interchangeable between the white and colored schools" (173). It is as if white people are worried they might get sick if they touch something that a black person has touched. Knowing that laws like these used to exist in our country makes me embarrassed; I am incredibly thankful that I no longer live in a world with this type of inequality. 
   So far, this book is quite enjoyable. I have also learned a lot about what life was like in the early 1960s. Although the story is filled with comedy and happiness, there are definitely parts that anger and upset me. For example, the thing that prompted Skeeter to interview black maids was when Hilly decided that it was only sanitary to have maids have separate bathrooms than whites. It is upsetting to think that back then, people truly believed that blacks were "contagious." It is ridiculous that separate bathrooms were needed in every household just so black maids did not have to use the bathroom that the owners used. Reading about things such as this make me even more hopeful that Skeeter will be successful in creating change and equality in her town.

The Help Entry 1: Ignorance

    Right now I am about 150 pages into The Help, and I have to say that I love it so far. The story captured my attention after just the first chapter, but it also has taught me a lot about what life was like for African American maids, as well as African Americans in general. The story takes place in Mississippi in the 1960s and focuses on a few different characters. Each chapter switches the perspective; getting to read from different characters' perspectives is very helpful, because it gives me a better understanding of how blacks and whites of all ages felt during this time period. For example, one of the main characters is named Aibileen and she is a black maid who works for a white woman. There is also Miss. Skeeter who is a white woman, but the more she gets to know the maids, the more she is against the way they are poorly treated.
    The whole story has been very interesting and thought-provoking, but there is one scene in particular that still sticks out in my mind. Miss. Skeeter is reflecting on her childhood and remembers one day when her mother told her before she went outside to play with other children, "Be nice to the little colored girls when you're down there." Then, Miss. Skeeter replied with, "Why wouldn't I be?" I found this part of the novel incredibly powerful. It truly demonstrates the idea of innocence. As a child, Miss. Skeeter was too young to understand the difference between a white child and a black child. To her, everyone was a human being and deserved to be treated equally. I think that this demonstrates how ignorant some people can be. No one grows up thinking that whites are more powerful or worthy than African Americans; they think that because that is what they are taught. It makes me sad to think that only children have such a loving and open mind, whereas so many adults are quick to judge and form opinions.
    Right now, the plot is beginning to form in the novel. Miss. Skeeter is determined to have a career in journalism, and as a result she is trying to create a novel that includes interviews from black maids who work for whites. It will be interesting to see how the story unfolds, because as many of the characters have commented, what she is doing is very dangerous. It could put both her life and the lives of the maids she is interviewing in danger. However, I hope that in the end the interviews will be published so that some of the more ignorant white characters can see the truth more clearly.

The Death Penalty - Cruel, Inhumane, Flawed, and Unsuccessful

    There are many steps and stages that take place during a capital case, and many of these are aimed towards helping the accused. Most importantly, the jury is taken under careful consideration. In a capital case, prospective jurors must be “death qualified,” so that they are able to make the proper decision regarding the defendant. In addition, the defendant has the opportunity to rebut the prosecution's evidence. This allows the defendant to establish innocence, showing that it is true that the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Once the verdict is made, the defendant cannot argue his or her innocence, but even if found guilty, he or she can still fight for a lesser punishment. They have the chance for a direct appeal and can attempt to reverse the court's decision. I believe that the system is made so that it can try its hardest so that only the guilty are convicted. However, despite this attempt, and the many stages in a capital case, it is still never certain that the defendant is fully guilty for the crime. Although I believe that the system is strong and can be trusted, it is still flawed in some ways and cannot completely guarantee that it only convicts the guilty.
    Personally, I do not believe that any type of intentional murder is humane. People have the right to live-how can we say that any death, even a painless one, is humane? Any type of killing is cruel and heartless. If I had to pick, I would say that the method of lethal injection is the most safe and successful. If injected successfully, no pain should result. I would expect there to be a greater chance of pain and discomfort from some of the other methods, such as electrocution or gun shots. The method of using a gas chamber, in my mind, is by far the worst. Millions of people were wrongly killed during the Holocaust by this method-it was wrong when Hitler did it, and it would be wrong to use now. I believe that all of the methods, with the exception of lethal injection, are cruel and unusual. Any time of discomfort that would be felt by the guilty individual would go against the 8th Amendment. I was disgusted to read that our country would allow such cruel methods of killing to take place within our country.
     The death penalty takes time, money, and effort. Once the defendant is found guilty and sentenced to death, they are placed on death row and not immediately executed. I noted that out of 3264 inmates on death row, only 1099 have been executed. Interestingly, Texas is the state with the most executions-405, yet California is the state with the most death row inmates. Virginia has the second most executions, yet it has the 22nd most total death row inmates. This discrepancy is shocking, and I believe it demonstrates the flaws within the system. 
     The first fact that I noticed was, "88% of these experts rejected the notion that the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder." If that's the case, then why do 35 current states still allow the death penalty? It was reassuring to note, however that out of 1226 executions since 1976, 1052 of those used lethal injection. Based on the information provided, I believe that lethal injection is clearly the best method. It is also interesting that the South had by far the most executions compared to the West, Midwest, and Northeast over the past 30 years. However, in 2009, the South still remains as the region with the highest murder rate. This makes me wonder how it can be said that the death penalty acts as a deterrent. The South uses the death penalty the most, but they still have the highest murder rate--not taking into account other factors, this proves that the death penalty does not stop murderers from killing. This information is incredibly interesting and insightful, and I think it is important for everyone to learn about it, because a decision regarding something as important as life and death requires as much knowledge as possible. I also believe that given these facts and statistics, it could change one's mindset towards the death penalty.

Did Clifford Boggess Deserve to Die?

  I am completely against the death penalty. I believe that killing others to show that killing is wrong is a statement that makes absolutely no sense. However, hearing the details of Boggess' case and forming an emotional attachment to it makes it difficult for me to say that I believe that Boggess does not deserve to be executed. After hearing his side of the story, it has only made it harder for me to argue against the death penalty. He showed me that he did not change. I would like to believe that people--even bad ones--have the power to change, but Boggess, unfortunately was not one of those individuals. He never showed any grief or regret towards his immoral actions. In addition to that, he was content with himself in prison. Since I firmly believe that Boggess deserves no right to happiness, the only other option would be to execute him. However, it is important to remember that I cannot let the emotional arguments get in the way of the most important fact. As much hatred people may feel towards Clifford Boggess, we must still remember that no one deserves to die, and the death penalty further teaches murderers that killing is moral.
   I believe that everyone individual has the right to live, and even if they don't use it, they have the potential to be of some value. Boggess might have been a terrible and sick man, but he was also an incredible artist. His value lied within his artistic abilities. It is wrong to kill him, and by doing so, the world misses out on the art that he could have provided. In addition to his value in society, the fact that the victims' families recieved no justice after the fact further proves that Boggess should not have recieved the death penalty. After watching Boggess get executed, one of the victim's granddaughters expressed that she still felt empty and hurt about her grandfather's death. She explained that Boggess got what he wanted; he picked the day he wanted to be killed and prepared himself so he was ready to die. The victims' families didn't recieve justice because killing Boggess did not bring their loved ones back.
   Am I happy that Boggess is no longer alive? Yes. But do I believe that he deserved to be executed? No. The death penalty sends out the wrong message by teaching others that killing is allowed. Even though Boggess hurt many people through his cruel actions, that does not mean that he should be killed as well. Everyone deserves the chance to change. Even though Boggess might never have grown into a good man, he deserves the change, just like all other individuals have. Executing Boggess did nothing for anyone; most importantly, it did not give the families the justice they were after. As hard as it may be for me to say after seeing and hearing about Clifford Boggess' insane mind and terrible crimes, I still believe that the death penalty is wrong and immoral.

Bullying - How Serious Is It?

    Bullying takes place in almost all schools, although some cases are more serious than others. What people don't realize is how serious bullying is. The movie Bullied helped to show how truly dangerous and hurtful bullying is; it doesn't only affect the student being bullied, but also the person doing the bullying, bystanders, and the parents involved. Jamie Nabozny had to deal with mental, physical, and verbal abuse, and it led him to feel the need to kill himself and run away from home. He couldn't take all the abuse, and rather than helping him, officials chose to ignore what was going on. Even worse, they blamed Jamie for all that was happening to him and told him that if he wanted to stop being bullied then he should stop acting so gay. By not stopping the bullying early on, it taught the students who were bullying Jamie that their actions were okay and allowed in school. Unfortunately, this led the bullying situation to spiral out of control; it grew so out of hand that it physically put Jamie's life in danger.
      One of the cases that really captured my attention was the case of United States v. Lori Drew. We read a short piece on this case in class; it explained how a mother, Lori Drew, created a fake Myspace profile to both spy and harass a young girl named Megan Meier. Due to the intense harassment and cyberbullying, Meier killed herself. After researching a little more about this case, I have found out that Lori Drew was convicted and then acquitted. Even though Drew ended up not being punished, many actions were taken to prevent this from happening again. An harassment law in Missouri was created to cover bullying over the internet. I think that this is incredibly important, because people must recognize that bullying comes in all different forms. Although the media often portrays bullying as some physical actions, it can also be in the form of verbal abuse, or even over the internet and through technology. I also learned about the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act that was introduced to Congress. The bill was designed to set a definition for the term cyberbullying; the definition claims that the behavior must be repeated, hostile, and severe to fall under that definition. The bill has not been passed yet, but it will hopefully soon, because many people often do not realize how serious cyberbulling is. It can even be worse than physical harassment, due to the fact that the bullying is not done face-to-face, so it is easier to say more hurtful and threatening things.
      I believe that bullying is a small problem at DHS, but people do not often realize it, because the bullying at our school is less physical and more verbal. To most people, bullying is defined as something physical, such as being pushed into a locker or tripped in the hallway. However, at DHS, bullying takes a new turn, and is often heard rather than seen. People are very judgmental at our school, and it causes people to feel the need to conform. It seems as if those that dress differently than the majority of the school are the ones that are most often made fun of and picked on. It is hard to stop this type of bullying, because it usually happens when large groups of people talk about others behind people's backs. It is not usually evident to school officials, because most of the bullying is all talk.
    Bullying is a very serious issue, but is something that is hard to prevent in schools. Teenagers are teenagers and they will act as they please and often conform to what others are doing. However, as individuals, we have the responsibility to make sure others feel safe. I believe that if students are more willing to stand up for those being bullied, then they will be able to outnumber and overpower the bullies at the school. The students who bully others often feel powerful when they are in that position because no one ever tells them to stop. However, if more bystanders were willing to say that bullying is wrong and that it needs to stop, those who are doing the bullying would not be as willing to continue with their wrongful actions. Bullying cannot be stopped unless everyone puts forth an effort; students must be aware of the consequences of both bullying, and being a bystander to bullying.

Freedom of Religion

   The First Amendment survey was very interesting, especially because the majority of people in 2010 (61%) knew about the right to free speech, but only 23% knew about the right of freedom of religion. People often pass over this right, forgetting how important it is to every citizen living in the United States. According to Charles Haynes, the United States is the most religiously diverse society on Earth. Not only is it the most diverse, but it is also the most religious. I believe that we have the First Amendment to thank for that. Our country has very religious people of many different religions, because the constitution allows for it. Often in other countries, people would have to live in fear if they wanted to practice their own religion. The United States remains a successful country because of it's freedom. We must make sure to allow this freedom everywhere-even in schools-or the constitution is not doing what it should be.
   Schools are where most students learn the most, and they will carry this knowledge with them throughout the rest of their lives. This shows how important it is to allow freedom of religion in schools, as long as it is not too disruptive to the learning process. If students learn early on that religion is not important enough to be allowed in schools, then they will grow up with the belief that freedom of religion is a useless right. It is extremely important to show students that this is not true, because it is our freedoms that allow our country to be so successful. I read that the government has ruled that no teachers are allowed to promote or denigrate any religion, and I believe that it is important for all school officials to follow this rule. Students must learn that they have the right to practice any religion they please, because this sense of freedom is significant.
   No one should be forced to pray or believe in a particular religion, because our constitution directly states that we have the right to freedom of religion. Schools cannot make prayer mandatory in school, because not everyone believes in it, and it violates the First Amendment. One other interesting fact from the survey I saw was that 54% strongly agree that student speakers should be allowed to speak about their religious faith at public school events, whereas only 12% strongly disagreed. This fact is important to note, because it shows that we have the right to speak freely about our religion and practice it. However, people must make sure not to confuse this right; we can practice any religion we want, but we cannot force others to, because they also have the freedom of religion.

How Safe Are Our Belongings in School?

   There have been many court cases regarding the Fourth Amendment right to privacy, but reading the four articles about school officials who went too far was incredibly interesting and surprising. One of the articles discussed a girl who was falsely accused of carrying drugs, and as a result she was strip searched by a school official. Interestingly enough, no drugs were found anywhere on her or her belongings. Although I believe that some searches must be allowed in schools in order for protection, strip searching a young girl based on another's unsupported accusation is wrong and unconstitutional. Despite the fact that privacy rights must sometimes be limited in schools in order to guarantee safety to the students, this strip search was not necessary. It must have been very difficult and embarrassing for the girl to go through that, and I think it is important for schools to realize that they do not have the authority to limit privacy rights to that extent.
   Another privacy issue that I read about was regarding the girl whose phone was searched by the principal. N.N. had her phone taken away when she broke the phone policy by using it during school hours. The phone was then sent to the principal, who spent time searching through her phone and the files on it. He had to go through multiple steps before finding a nude picture of N.N. He punished and suspended the girl based on the photo on her cellphone. I find this unconstitutional and it was not the principal's place to go searching through her phone. She got in trouble for talking on it, so all the principal was required to do was keep it in his office. He went out of his way to search through her phone, and this action was unnecessary and an inappropriate breach of privacy. Court cases have proven that searches in schools can be allowed when it is reasonable and there is probable cause. In this case, the principal had no reason to believe that N.N. was hiding anything illegal on her phone, and this proves that he did not have the right to go searching through it.
   Although I am in favor of certain privacy breaches, I believe that they should only be allowed when they are necessary for the protection and order of the schools. For example, if there is a bomb threat at the school, officials should be able to search through every student's backpack before they enter the school. This limits the student's privacy rights to their belongings, but it is crucial to have this search in order to guarantee safety. However, the three cases that were discussed in the articles are very shocking to me and I believe that in all three situations the officials went too far and the students were treated unfairly. School officials must be aware of the rights that the students have and it is unconstitutional for them to limit their privacy rights to a full extent.

Is Drug Testing Constitutional?

  Many court cases have already determined that drug testing should be allowed in schools. In Vernonia v. Acton, New Jersey v. T.L.O. and Board of Education v. Earls, the court has ruled that drug testing is not a large breach of privacy, and should therefore be allowed. I agree with these court decisions and am completely in favor of drug testing. Drug tests are used to benefit the students; they are important in order to detect and prevent drug use among students in high schools.
   Drug testing should be allowed for many reasons, but the main reason is that it is still constitutional. Some argue that it goes against the Fourth Amendment, but in reality, drug testing is really not an invasion of privacy. The steps that are taken to test the students are used in other situations, such as when someone goes for a doctor's checkup. The small breach of privacy is something that is neccessary in order to protect all students and allow them to feel safe in school. Schools have the responsibility to make sure that their students feel safe and protected, and drug use is something that prevents this feeling of comfort for most students. This shows the importance of drug testing, because the benefits of schools drug testing their athletes, or all students, outweight the costs.
   The Fourth Amendment still applies to students in schools, but some limitations must be put on their rights. For example when discussing searching procedures, the amendment states that a warrant is required before a search can take place. However, the Court has ruled that the requirement of a warrant is unnecessary in schools because it is unsuited to the learning enviornment. A warrant interfers with school procedures. This shows that some rights must be limited due to the enviornment-in this case, it is a school. For this reason, drug testing is appropriate and can be considered constitutional.
   Schools have the right to drug test their students because the level of privacy intrusion is so small compared to the high nature of government interest. School officials must make sure that their students are safe, and testing for drug use will help to prevent students from using drugs. Although drug testing may limit some rights, including the Fourth Amendment, it is still necessary in order to guarentee safety among the school.

9/11: A Day We Will Never Forget

     Thinking about the day of September 11, 2001 is haunting, terrifying, and upsetting. Watching the movie Seven Days in September took these emotions to a whole different level, but at the same time, I learned a lot about the day of the attacks and the days following them that I had never known before. Knowing that so many people had to die that day is very saddening, but it is even more upsetting to think about the people who had to stand by and watch their friends and family die and how so many people lost someone important to them that day. The main emotion that I saw was evident throughout the entire film was 'shock.' So many Americans were just simply in awe in the moments that the towers were blown up. One of most captivating scenes was when the man and woman-who were fortunately able to run from the explosion in just enough time-were being interviewed. They were so shocked and relieved that they had just escaped death by just a few seconds, that they didn't even know what to say. They just sat there, without even realizing how thankful they should be.
      Days later, the one scene that I still cannot get out of my mind is when the movie showed the one man falling as he jumped from one of the windows of the tower. This man chose to jump to his death, rather than remain in the building. The video of this man falling is so tragic and haunting and truly demonstrates how difficult this day was. It also reminds me to be thankful for the life I have, because the thought of this man having to make the impossible choice-to suffocate by the smoke in the building, or jump and fall hundreds of stories to his death-is too difficult to even imagine.
      As upsetting as this movie was, it also was beautiful. It showed how powerful our country is and the beauty that exists within. It was very moving to watch the people line up on the sides of a street to cheer on and thank the rescue workers as they drove by. The amount of people there was astounding, and I believe that this is what motivated the workers to keep going even when it seemed like there was no hope left. The idea of hope was also evident when random people walking on the street stopped to help in many different ways. For example, the movie showed men and women stopping to build stretchers for the injured bodies, as well as groups of people who gave food in order to provide for the rescue workers. This huge amount of support that was demonstrated over these few days in September really illuminates the beauty that exists within the United States. It shows how people truly care about the safety of others, and even with their lives in danger, thousands of people still chose to help in the best way they could.
     The movie was very powerful and moving in many ways, because it showed how scary September 11th and the days that followed the attacks were for the people of New York, but it also demonstrated the love that America has. Despite the terrifying events, people were able to turn to one another for comfort and to find a way to keep their faith. It's unfortunate that it takes such a massive tragedy to bring people together, and I think that the scenes shown in Seven Days in September are able to act as a symbol of hope; it shows America the strength and support that we can give to one another and that despite our different values and outlooks on life, we are all still here to help one another.

Limiting the First Amendment

     Recently in class, we have been discussing the ideas of speech codes. A speech code is any rule that limits or restricts speech. It is used to prevent hate speech and fighting words. Many individuals argue that speech codes are a violation of our First Amendment rights. Even though some speech codes many be considered too vague or broad to be fair and successful, I still believe that some speech codes are necessary in certain cases.
     Hate speech must be prohibited when necessary, because it can often be a  breach of the peace. The First Amendment-although it protects free speech-does not protect harassment. Hate speech is not only offensive to the individuals it targets, but it can usually be considered a form of harassment. It often tends to promote a violent reaction, thus distrubing the peace. In class we focused on the use of speech codes in universities. After class discussions and assigments, I have come to the conclusion that they should be allowed as long as they focus on a direct issue at hand. Speech codes must have a sole purpose, otherwise they are broad, confusing, and useless.
    If universities do not limit some forms of freedom of speech, then the campuses can turn in to chaos. In almost all cases, speech codes are created to protect others. If people can go around harassing anyone they disagree with or don't like, then how can anyone feel safe? It is important for universities to have the best interest of their students in mind, and if that requires them to slightly limit the students' rights freedom of speech, then it should be allowed.
    I believe that speech codes must exist in some cases for the purpose of protection. Although I agree with FIRE, when they state that speech codes can be unfair because they often limit someone's rights, I also believe that sometimes these limitations are necessary. Those who create speech codes must be sure that they restrict the First Amendment just enough, so that it prevents violence and disruption, but does not completly violate anyone's rights. More often than not, the gray area is what is most successful. For example, if everyone has complete freedom to do anything they want, it endagers the lives and safety of others. On the other hand, if individuals have no rights, then the situation is unjust. For this reason, not everything can be black and white. Sometimes a mix is what is more successful. If individuals have limited restrictions on their rights, a good mix of freedom and control exists, thus allowing for a happy and successful country.