University free to have standards

The Bill of Rights seems to have become little more than a collection of buzzwords in today's society. For every transgression there seems to be a legal action, warranted or not.

In the United States, there is almost a handbook of briefs to file. Slip on an icy sidewalk, spill hot coffee on yourself or get fired from your job and we all know what to do. Somewhere out there exists a lawyer with some case law, ready to jump to the aid of the oppressed.

It has even come to the point that morality is judged on whether or not something can stand up in a court of law. For years, members of the State College Borough Council have been looking at ways to segregate students, even though they know it's wrong. The only thing stopping them so far has been the fact that they can't legally do it.

Unfortunately, as a society, we have become so engrossed in our hopes of get-rich-quick lawsuits that we forgot the real reason our legal system exists and the reasons behind these laws. We have become unable to separate the legitimate cases of violated rights from the illegitimate.

The latest legal right to be trampled upon is freedom of speech at Penn State.

Let's put things into perspective. Freedom of Speech is NOT the freedom to say what you want to say, where you want to say it, at any time. Neither is it a mandate for Penn State to put its stamp of approval on a any group that comes knocking to use the University's name.

From what I have seen, the group most concerned about their freedoms being violated has announced their plight on the steps of Willard Building, across the bulletin boards of the HUB and in the news and editorial sections of the Daily Collegian. Anybody who feels that their right to freedom of speech, freedom to assemble or freedom of thought have been violated must have been living in a cave for the last week.

The Bill of Rights does exist at Penn State. In the past two weeks, there have been two rallies in the spirit of the right to peaceably assemble. Similarly, it is the freedom of speech that allows Gary Cattell, the Willard Preacher, to occupy the steps of the Willard building, even though he serves as the epitome of hypocrisy undermining the very tenements of Christianity that many of us have been exposed to since childhood (sorry, Gary's personal mission should really be saved for a different column).

As a state-related institution, Penn State cannot and most likely will not try to put a stop to some of the examples above. However, at the same time, the University is not mandated to put its name and stamp of approval on every organization that comes knocking. BEARING THE PENN STATE NAME IS NOT A RIGHT BUT A PRIVILEGE.

What is at issue is not the freedom of speech, but Penn State's freedom to not put its name on products and groups that it feels do not meet its mission.

There are valid questions surrounding the University's current policies on registering organizations. As an institution of higher learning, the University should be committed to providing an intellectual discourse on current issues -- but be very clear that it does not have to.

Attacks claiming alternative agendas and court bias are groundless and essentially the babblings of some angry people.

The bottom line is that the University has a policy that establishes its requirements for organizations that bear its name, and the reality is that some organizations will do absolutely nothing to improve the community. Whether or not that should matter is a different argument.

People who are upset must stop hiding behind the banner of the Constitution and come to terms with the real situation.

In reality, the rights that they claim Penn State has trampled have nothing to do with the Constitution, but instead Penn State's role as a catalyst for discourse. It is not until the real arguments have been sifted through that a real resolution to this conflict can be found.