In the name of open-mindedness, students at Appalachian State University took the hypocritical stance of opposing state Sen. Dan Soucek’s Veterans Day speech, saying the Boone Republican’s stance on gay marriage runs contrary to the campus’ “accepting Appalachian way.” Close-minded though they may be, Soucek’s views should not be discarded on the grounds that some will disagree with them. If Appalachian State University wants to tout its openness, it should be more inclined to have a free and open exchange of ideas.
In a letter to the ASU chancellor protesting Soucek’s speech, students wrote that his opposition to gay marriage was against the “open-minded and accepting Appalachian way.” While it’s true that the Defense of Marriage amendment Soucek supports would create an environment of intolerance toward gay North Carolinians, attempting to suppress his speech isn’t the right way to protest his point of view.
An open debate should always be sought after, not avoided. Students should have welcomed Soucek’s visit as an opportunity to engage in a discussion and build upon the momentum being created by the school’s Student Government Association, which is considering a vote against the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, which North Carolinians will vote on in May.
This episode should also serve as a lesson to UNC students, who have shown a similar resistance to entertaining opposing viewpoints in recent years. In April 2009, an unwieldy protest led to a broken window and forced former U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R.-Colo., to stop speaking only minutes into his on-campus speaking engagement. Three dozen police officers and a mobile command center were needed to ensure a more civil discussion one year later, when Tancredo was invited back.
This year, similar concerns arose when the College Republicans sought funding to bring conservative pundit Ann Coulter to campus. Student Congress asked the group to take on a $15,000 loan to fund the talk, an impossible request that the College Republicans took to be a deliberate suppression of Coulter’s views.
Students’ extreme partiality to opinions that differ from their own violates the spirit of debate that should be present at all college campuses, where students should be able to challenge their views and those of others. To attempt to block opposing viewpoints and rationalize it by calling oneself “open-minded” shows a misunderstanding not only of that term but of what a campus should be.
