First amendment right issues are constantly becoming a topic of debate recently. It would seem that everyone could agree that the freedom of speech is easily one of our most important rights given to us under the Constitution, but recently it has sparked conflict. Such instances are seen in the presidential election and with Colin Kaepernick. No matter what people do these days, there is always someone upset. People are always trying to state that someone isn't allowed to say or do something despite the Constitution clearly expressing that we are guaranteed the ability to do so. Of all the places that you would definitely not want to curb free speech, a university is not one of those places.

September 17th was Constitution Day. For those who may have missed Constitution Day, it is a federal observance that recognizes the ratification of our nation's constitution and for those have become citizens. To celebrate this widely forgotten day; the Young Americans for Liberty chapter at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, my school, erected two massive boards and placed them on campus. Written in large letters at the top of these boards were the words "FREE SPEECH". Each board came with a set of markers. No rules or guidelines were given regarding the nature of what was to be written on the board. It was truly up to the student population to display anything that was in their mind. This meant many Trump and Hillary remarks, a certain deceased gorilla, and other words of wisdom or certain explicit content. People seemed hesitant at first to write their words that anyone on campus could see, but soon the whole board started to fill up. The boards were a creative and enjoyable idea that allowed for some fun on campus after a long week of classes. As suddenly as they came in though, the boards left after someone painted "UWEC is racist" and "Trump sucks" over the face of the boards.

This was annoying since so many people had written on that board only to have their writing covered up by black paint. It was enjoyable to go over to the giant boards in the middle of campus and go and read what everyone had said. As soon as it was discovered that there were two very large messages covering up a significant portion of the board, the boards were removed from campus. On Facebook the university stated that they had been scheduled to be removed after the allotted time given to the student organization.

Despite what they said, students were not happy. I saw comments on Facebook stating that this action reflects a lot about what university when it takes down a message as soon as it claims something about the school, in this instance: '"UWEC is racist". Others wished that the board was left up longer or kept around all year as it was interesting to see the opinions of other students on campus. I too am one of these people, even with the statement released by the school. Even though I am a little bothered by the fact that someone thought it was alright to cover up what others had said, it is also upsetting that the boards were then removed by the university as soon as they were discovered, rather than being removed over the weekend like they were supposed to.

In this case we may never know if the school removed them due to the painting on the free speech boards. This discussion comes into the crossfire of the discussion about what exactly can be said on college campuses. In September of 2015 the Wesleyan Argus, a student newspaper at Wesleyan University in Connecticut published an opinionated article that questioned the tactics used by the Black Lives Matter group. The Washington Post cited that the student government at the university took steps towards cutting the budget for that newspaper the next year. So was it right for the newspaper to publish this article? Absolutely. Will everyone agree with it? No, that is why it is an opinion piece. So then is it justified to try and curb free speech in a case like this? No.

This situation can be a reference to almost any instance of free speech. You can be upset that your opposing candidate's supporters are making a mockery of your candidate, but it doesn't give you the right to justify that as wrong. You might think that what Colin Kaepernick did was wrong since he didn't stand for the national anthem, but he has every right to do so. So then what about homophobic, racist, xenophobic, sexist, or bigoted comments? Where should universities be able to draw the line on free speech?

My own expressed beliefs tell me that it is wrong to hate people because of the color of their skin or support anyone who might be writing hate speech about people of the Islamic faith or gay people. My beliefs also are that I can't tell someone that they can't be xenophobic or homophobic. I can try and validate my reasoning to people or have a discussion with them about it, but I can't stop anyone from saying something that they want to say. It'll make me and others uncomfortable, but at the end of the day it is their right to say it. The university however has a different opinion. One of the first things I heard here is that comments of this sort are not to be tolerated on campus. Now one side of me agrees that it is time for our nation to move past racism and bigotry, but on the other hand I wonder if it is really fair to tell people what to think? We should be educating people, rather than forcing them to believe in something. Nothing forced will ever work nearly as much as talking to people and learning why they feel the way they do. That is why the free speech boards were such a great idea, people displayed the way they felt about certain issues.

The question of how much universities should be able to curb free speech will be discussed for years to come. The outcome of such a debate will reflect on what our nations ideals are. Are we willing to curb free speech in order to create a more fair and equal society or will we have to justify hate speech under the first amendment? The question will test us as we progress as a society.