In an attempt to strike a blow against hate acts, the Undergraduate Student Government Senate created an ad-hoc group called the Tolerance and Equality Committee.

This group is supposed to examine how the university responds to acts of hate, assess organizations accused of committing such acts, give reports to the senate concerning specific actions and share that information with "stakeholders."

The committee defines "stakeholders" as all parties with an interest in the particular act of hate committed.

Shouldn't all people regardless of sex, gender or creed have an interest in any act of hate? Why is the committee only providing information on certain acts? And what is an act of hate, exactly?

Under the senate committee's guidelines, it's any action that negatively targets a person because of his or her race, sexual orientation, age, political ideology or other attributes. If a person doesn't report an act of hate, then that person also executed an act of hate.

If an individual denounces another harshly because of deep ideological differences, that person's words could be defined by the committee as hate speech.

Just because one might find somebody's comments uncomfortable does not mean it's necessarily an act of hate.

The vagueness of what falls under the concern of this committee poses a nagging problem for many people. USG should clearly set boundaries for what the group deems acceptable and what it deems improper.

Keep in mind, also, that the committee has no real power to levy any punishment against a person or organization.

The greatest power this group of student representatives can hope to wield in its current form is the power to speak out about any abuses.

USG must take great pains to make sure that issues taken up by this committee don't start down a slippery slope, which could restrict free speech on campus.

Trying to curb hateful acts at Penn State is a great goal. We could use a watchdog for that purpose.

However, encroaching on free speech should not be the price for that.