To The Editor:
As a former longtime Valley resident whose kids were educated in The Valley schools and who just happened to be reading The Valley Reporter over the weekend, I was extremely heartened to read Harwood correspondent, Claire Pomer's account of how the HUUSD administrators and the CARE student group chose to respond to a formal request from an advocacy group, the Shalom Alliance, not to host a planned showing and facilitated discussion of a film on student protests against the war in Gaza ("The Encampments").
With all the bad news about the declining literacy skills of students today, it was wonderful, first of all, to read such a cogent, detailed, unbiased account of this sensitive issue from a student journalist. It was honestly better than what we get from many professional journalists today.
Secondly, the school district under Dr. Mike Leichliter appears to have done exactly what it should have which is consult with its attorneys. Those lawyers decided that this was a classic case of protected student free speech because attendance was voluntary and schools cannot decide which student groups may use their facilities based on the content of the speech.
Finally, the student group, which seems to be impressively led by junior Harmony Devoe, decided to postpone the showing out of concern not to offend or inadvertently make anyone uncomfortable. Meanwhile, it polled the student body to gauge their interest in and comfort with the discussion topic. The group has not, however, agreed not to show the film just based on the pressure.
Free speech is under direct attack today from every quarter. Unfortunately, many of our trusted educational and other institutions have self-censored to avoid negative publicity. This is an abdication of responsibility. If students can't respectfully and voluntarily come together to discuss challenging issues of the day with fellow students in a safe space, then we will only worsen our divided society. Where better to learn and practice these essential skills than in school? In terms of free speech, it is critical that all our institutions follow the law in distinguishing between speech that might cause discomfort and speech that directly harms individuals such as harassment, incitement to imminent lawless action, "true threats," and defamation.
Anne Bordonaro
Williston, VT
You might also like
