TO THE EDITOR:
You missed the point not once, but twice. In the Thursday article, "Civil rights controversy closes," and again in Monday's opinion piece, "Closing the book," The Daily Tar Heel's staffers seem to have completely disregarded what this case was all about: a student's free speech.
The copy of the report that was sent to my office by the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights has a clear cut conclusion: "The e-mail message not only subjected the student to intentional discrimination and harassment, but also discouraged the robust exchange of ideas that is intrinsic to higher education and is at the very heart of the Constitution's protection of free speech."
Not once did the editorial staff or reporter Jenny Ruby mention that the department's report stated that the student's First Amendment right to free speech was violated when Elyse Crystall called him "a white, heterosexual, Christian male" and accused him of "violent, heterosexist comments" - all because he voiced his beliefs in the classroom.
The point was not that UNC was cleared. The point was that a student's constitutionally granted First Amendment right to free speech was trampled upon by an instructor with the power to intimidate. This report should have served as vindication for that student and certainly not as praise for UNC, where Ms. Crystall continues to be employed even after her egregious constitutional breach.
Despite that the DTH is a student-run paper, apparently, for at least some on its staff, sticking up for a student's right to free speech is not as important as reporting that the University's administration is "blameless" and "responsible." I would be interested to see if the DTH would run a similar story if its First Amendment right to free speech was violated.
My hunch is it wouldn't.
Walter Jones
