quote:
Define "major". I think it would be a pretty big deal at any Ivy League school, for example.

The problem at A&M was they allowed anybody to speak in their facilities. And the administration initially spoke up for First Amendment rights, which made no sense to me. The rule has been changed such that a speaker has to be sponsored by some university-recognized organization. Which won't help if A&M has a local white power club recognized by the school, but I don't see that happening.

You understand what that means right and why restricting it to student group sponsors is a bad idea right? This allow the university de facto control over who gets to speak because they can just disallow any group that they disagree with from being an official organization.

The fact that people actually think it's a good idea to ban any kind of speech from a university is mind-boggling to me. It's a public university and therefore the university cannot legally keep people from speaking provided they are not breaking the law or trying to incite violence. For instance, calling for the deaths of groups of people would be ban worthy, but saying you are an advocate for your race is not.

By calling for speech to be banned, you are inadvertently invoking the Streisand Effect wherein the more outcry there is for something to be banned, the more attention is drawn to it.