2008 Woodie Awards
Sippin' On Some Haterade
Main Editorial
Issue date: 11/11/04 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
The last week here at Montclair State University has witnessed a flurry of hate displays, albeit on two different sides of the law: defacement of school property in the form of swastikas found on the doors of several Bohn Hall residents, and a campus protestor, Matthew Bourgault, railing against the practices of homosexuality. In the most culturally diverse region of arguably the most tolerant nation in the world, here in the 21st century we are still confronted by the disease of hate.
The key word in the phrase "hate crime" is not hate, but crime; that is what makes it a punishable offense. While the Bohn Hall vandal was arrested for bias, it was not his beliefs that got him in trouble - it was his decision to scrawl his beliefs on school property. By the school reacting as swiftly as it did, they made their "zero tolerance" policy clear to all students.
Just as the incident with the homophobic minister may qualify as a display of hate, legally he had every right to be there. Having filed the appropriate paperwork with the school, he was merely voicing his opinion, not physically assaulting the students. His views were extremely controversial on a liberal campus, and thus was provided with police protection, his right to the First Amendment guarded and secure.
In both situations, justice was served on behalf of the school and order has been established; those who commit hate crimes will be prosecuted and reprimanded accordingly, and those who legally exercise their right to free opinion, regardless of what that opinion may be, will be protected from those who may feel otherwise.
For all the complaints that one can have about this school, this is one instance in which it has gotten things right. There is no question that had the University decided not to provide police protection last week, Bourgault's personal safety would quite possibly have been compromised, and similarly, the right to voice a view contrary to popular opinion would have been compromised as well.
MSU may not be as diverse as it likes to think, but it is fairly diverse nonetheless; filled with different creeds, races, ideologies, and viewpoints. This week served as a reminder that the constituion still has relevance, and that the rights of every student will be protected equally without equivocation.
The key word in the phrase "hate crime" is not hate, but crime; that is what makes it a punishable offense. While the Bohn Hall vandal was arrested for bias, it was not his beliefs that got him in trouble - it was his decision to scrawl his beliefs on school property. By the school reacting as swiftly as it did, they made their "zero tolerance" policy clear to all students.
Just as the incident with the homophobic minister may qualify as a display of hate, legally he had every right to be there. Having filed the appropriate paperwork with the school, he was merely voicing his opinion, not physically assaulting the students. His views were extremely controversial on a liberal campus, and thus was provided with police protection, his right to the First Amendment guarded and secure.
In both situations, justice was served on behalf of the school and order has been established; those who commit hate crimes will be prosecuted and reprimanded accordingly, and those who legally exercise their right to free opinion, regardless of what that opinion may be, will be protected from those who may feel otherwise.
For all the complaints that one can have about this school, this is one instance in which it has gotten things right. There is no question that had the University decided not to provide police protection last week, Bourgault's personal safety would quite possibly have been compromised, and similarly, the right to voice a view contrary to popular opinion would have been compromised as well.
MSU may not be as diverse as it likes to think, but it is fairly diverse nonetheless; filled with different creeds, races, ideologies, and viewpoints. This week served as a reminder that the constituion still has relevance, and that the rights of every student will be protected equally without equivocation.