In Defense of Speech

I. Intro: On February the first, at the University of California, Berkeley, a man named

Milo Yiannopoulos was going to give a speech. Many students gathered to protest

him, holding signs saying “Hate Speech is not Free Speech.” Eventually the protests

got violent when masked agitators arrived and started a riot. Windows were

smashed, buildings were set ablaze, and people were injured. All of this happened

just because they didn’t want to hear someone’s speech.

A. People equating speech with violence is becoming a very popular idea lately.

According to John Villasenor, a Stanford graduate and a nonresident senior

fellow at Brookings Institute, a recent poll conducted by the institute in 49 states

and D.C. showed that nineteen percent of respondents thought violence is an

acceptable answer to speech they don’t agree with. Another example of this

lunacy is from Lisa Feldman Barret. In her article “When is speech violence?” she

writes, “If words can cause stress, and if prolonged stress can cause physical

harm, then it seems that speech--at least certain types of speech--can be a form

of violence.” This is insanity. Just because someone says things that stress you, it

doesn’t mean you can hurt them. I can’t hurt my teachers just because the work

stresses me. As I mentioned earlier, before the protest went violent, students

were holding signs that said, “Hate Speech is not Free Speech.” This is a very evil

and foolish stance to take, as our First Amendment right protects our speech.

The Supreme Court has upheld our right to free speech many times. There are a
few examples though of certain illegal speech, and those are things like actually

threatening to hurt somebody.