Do we need free speech zones?

A little over a week ago the state assembly passed resolution 35 that urges Californian universities to work against allowing speech critical of the State of Israel. Regardless of one’s views on the Israel-Palestine debacle, this is a horrendous action on part of the state assembly. Even more horrifying is that the resolution does not distinguish between critics of the Israel State’s policies and the question of whether there should be a State of Israel at all. This means, for the sake of example, that complaining about the State of Israel’s minimum wage laws would be considered as anti-Semetic.

How long will it be before the state assembly deems criticism of the United States or California’s government policies as anti-American?

It is clear that CSUN needs to create a campus-wide free speech zone in order to ensure the free discussion of ideas. If ideas cannot be freely exchanged on campuses, why in the world even go to college? To work out in the over-glorified gym or pick up men at parties? Nay! A college is foremost meant to be a place of learning and discussion; picking up men comes second to that.

Now, what exactly would a free speech zone entail? For starters it would mean that students would not have to ask permission in order to hand out flyers or to post literature on billboards. It is reasonable that students need to reserve space on the Clearly Walk stone tables, as there is a limited amount of these stone tables, but it is less clear why students need to ask permission to table on the many open areas of the campus. As long as the flow of traffic is not hampered, why should it matter if a table is set up here and there?