Two Acts of Free Speech

 

A bit over a week ago, some pupils at Valdosta State University engaged in a protest centered on walking and stomping on the US flag — a flag Americans have been maimed and have died defending, a flag symbolizing the very freedom of speech that allows protesters to desecrate the flag as part of their protest.

Yes, desecrating our flag is a despicable act, but that’s what gives power to a protest of this sort. The act is an expression of political speech, and it is legitimately protected as such.

Then, after the protest had made its point, Air Force veteran Michelle Manhart entered the protest and took the flag away from the protesters. Although her act was more impromptu and less carefully planned, it was—and is—no less an act of free speech. Her protest, also centering on the desecration of our flag, was to defend the flag against that desecration.

Valdosta reacted to the exchange by punishing Manhart (and excusing the other protesters): she’s banned from school property and events.

My questions to Dr William McKinney, Valdosta President, and to Dr Hudson Rogers, Valdosta Provost and Acting Vice President for Student Affairs (and to others interested), are these:

On what basis do you place more value on one act of free speech than on another?

On what basis do you consider one act of free speech blameless and another act worthy of punishment?

What boundary do you use to permit one man’s unfettered free speech while limiting another’s?

 

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 34 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. user_136364 Inactive
    user_136364
    @Damocles

    Mark Steyn nailed it in this article:

    Don’t worry, Old Glory can take the heat

    http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0605/steyn062705.php3

    • #31
  2. Tommy De Seno Member
    Tommy De Seno
    @TommyDeSeno

    Stomping on the flag – free speech.

    Open a Chik-fil-A on Campus – “microagression.”

    Good grief.

    • #32
  3. ctlaw Coolidge
    ctlaw
    @ctlaw

    Tommy De Seno:Stomping on the flag – free speech.

    Open a Chik-fil-A on Campus – “microagression.”

    Good grief.

    Stomping on the US flag – free speech.

    Flying a US flag – “microagression.”

    Advice to all patriotic college students: if the campus police ask you about the US flag you are flying, just say that you are drying it out so it will burn easier.

    • #33
  4. Howellis Inactive
    Howellis
    @ManWiththeAxe

    Mama Toad:Here’s a nice image of Staff Sgt. Manhart, who knows how to respect the flag:

    Screen shot 2015-04-27 at 9.49.26 PM

    Classy.

    First time I’ve ever wanted to throw a flag on the floor and stomp on it.

    • #34
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.