http://observer.case.edu/Archives/Volume_40/Issue_6/Story_1977/
The anti-Semitic message that appeared on the Thwing Spirit Wall a week ago (see story, page one) was a powerful reminder that the American quest for equality and tolerance is far from over. The incident provoked a school-wide response, indicating that the vast majority of the Case community takes the issue of intolerance very seriously.
It’s disappointing that prejudice is still an issue for some of us, but sweeping it under the table won’t solve the problem. It is absolutely essential to talk about how we can best bridge the gaps of equality that are evident all over the United States.
However, these conversations don’t need to be started by shameless displays of ignorance like the message on the Spirit Wall. For instance, Monday’s Jena Six rally on the KSL Oval (page one) and last week’s Israel Lobby talk in Ford Auditorium (page eight) sparked plenty of debate – in a constructive way. Though these events may have angered some people, they were certainly more intelligent demonstrations of opinion than the message on the Spirit Wall.
This isn’t an issue of free speech. First, if you’re not willing to take responsibility for your opinions, you don’t deserve to share them. This is a college campus, not a gas station lavatory.
Second, the Thwing Spirit Wall is private property governed by three simple rules:
- Any member(s) of the Case community may use the wall for promoting campus events and informing the student body.
- Painting on the wall can only take place after midnight and before 6 a.m., to allow for one full day of exposure.
- No obscenities, profanity, or hurtful messages are allowed.
The anti-Semitic message clearly violated two of these rules: it did not promote a campus event or inform the student body of anything (except the artist(s)’s ignorance, of course), and it was both profane and hurtful to many members of the campus community.
Almost more upsetting than the message itself is the fact that it was not removed from the wall until Monday afternoon. Someone – namely the Student Executive Committee, who created the rules that govern the wall – must take responsibility for monitoring the content of the Spirit Wall in the future. Whether it’s a once-a-day verification that all messages appearing on the wall are acceptable for display, or a security camera to help better identify those who choose ignorance over decency, something must be done to prevent another incident like this one from occurring.
It is our responsibility as a university to promote tolerance and diversity. Let us do so in the most intelligent, eloquent manner possible.
