Speaking Freely

IT IS THE DUTY of government to legislate the way its citizens act. It is however, contrary to the ideals of a democratic society to advocate a government legislating against a person's thoughts, no matter how offensive, inflammatory, or morally repugnant they may be to some. Freedom of thought is perhaps the most fundamental of all.

Yet this weekend's picketers and the majority opinion are attempting to deny the members of the Pi Eta Speaker's Club that right. The Club's newsletter which sparked the protest may have been agressively offensive, yet that does not warrant calling for an official University reprimand. In this instance the majority is asking the University--in no sense the College community's government--to make a legislative statement against bad taste, something it simply must not do.

The University has the responsibility to take moral positions and stands and encourage its students to. Yet all the University can do is teach its students how to think and take positions on specific ethical issues. The Pi newsletter is not an ethical issue; it is an expression of thought as guaranteed under the Constitution. The University should watch the Pi Eta and all student organizations carefully and not permit any form of actual sexism or sex discrimination. Any actual acts of discrimination should he dealt with swiftly and harshly. In addition, Harvard should cut any and all administrative and financial ties it has to Pi Eta or any of the final clubs, all of which discriminate on the basis of sex. But the University must refrain from actually censuring attitudes of which it may not approve and rely instead on education and a fair public debate to change people's perceptions.