Neither side in speech incident reflects UNC
As a student at UNC-Chapel Hill, I was disappointed by Rosemary Roberts’ column concerning the recent controversy over the visit of former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo.
Yes, Mr. Tancredo was the guest of a group heralded as “xenophobic” by much of the campus. Yes, he was prevented from speaking as he was shouted down by radical protesters. But no, the university’s reputation ought not to be considered “tarnished” as neither the members of Youth for Western Civilization nor the protesters are representative of the campus and its ideals. The majority of students have been both embarrassed and outraged by the demonstration, and are appalled by the reckless disregard for freedom of speech, arguably this nation’s most revered tenet.
Do not attribute the actions of only a few students to the lot of us, and do not assail the reputation of The University of the People for it, either.
Anne Marie Tosco
Greensboro
Comments (7)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
It was only the actions of a few, yet those few managed to tarnish the image of the university. This is nothing new, it happens at universities regularly when someone perceived to have a conservative viewpoint speaks and attempts to do so. That's why it's laughable that the same people who preach tolerance and diversity are very intolerant and non-diverse when it comes to opposing opinions.
Posted on April 28, 2009 6:32 AM
It's not xenophobic to want the law upheld. It's not xenophobic to oppose ILLEGAL immigration. Do college students have any grasp of English anymore? I guess I'm xenophobic to expect that students at American universities understand the difference in meaning between the English words "legal" and "illegal."
While many students I know are young adults seriously pursuing knowledge, I also see a disturbing number of little kids who are ruled by emotion, not by reason. They've been taught to feel, not to think. How are they supposed to function in a nation founded by those who believed in the rule of law, not of men (e.g. feelings?)
Posted on April 28, 2009 8:30 AM
Seems like 1963 at UNC all over again. Only this time, we're not banning Communist speech, we're banning Conservative speech.
Posted on April 28, 2009 9:11 AM
What's this 'University of the People' crap?
Posted on April 28, 2009 9:16 AM
But Laettner against Kentucky? Omg, what a shot. Carolina students have suffered from post-trauma/not as magical disease to this day.
It affects their thinking.
Posted on April 28, 2009 9:24 AM
But Laettner against Kentucky? Omg, what a shot. Carolina students have suffered from post-trauma/not as magical disease to this day.
It affects their thinking.
Posted on April 28, 2009 9:25 AM
I'm not sure I would characterize Mr. Tancredo's group as xenophobic. Xenophobia means an irrational fear of a particular racial group. Tancredo opposes illegal immigration, and allowing illegal immigrants to access services paid for by legal residents and US citizens.
It is true Tancredo and his supporters are fanatical about their point of view, which makes it hard to have a dialogue with them.
But the same exact thing is true of the students who forced them to shut down.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that the actions of a few can tar the reputations of the many with the same brush. It's not fair. It's life.
The way the LTE writer puts quotation marks around "xenophobic," makes me think she is more in sympathy with the student protesters who violated Tancredo's free speech rights, than any outraged group of students embarrassed by said protests.
You can't have it both ways: you can't claim the moral high ground of supporting one set of rights (immigrants) while taking away the free speech rights of those who dissent.
Posted on April 28, 2009 3:40 PM