Laying future foundations

Wednesday was no ordinary day on the University of Idaho campus.

Sidewalks leading to the Idaho Student Union Building — formerly the Idaho Commons — were lined with precautionary signs, each notifying students of graphic pictures and displays ahead. A UI-staffed table provided free speech information to curious students. Poster-making supplies were made available at the Department of Student Involvement. Campus security stood vigilant nearby.

At the center of the commotion was something most students have already seen firsthand — a pro-life group demonstration.

These demonstrators were only armed with GoPros and signs held high, but many of these signs contained graphic language and visuals.

But students knew to look for the graphic visuals well in advance of the event. President Scott Green sent an email Tuesday afternoon detailing the upcoming event and the precautions in place, citing resources students could utilize and making it clear the university was not sponsoring the event in any form.

While Green’s email may be seen as unnecessary or unfounded by some, it’s an important step toward promoting peaceful demonstration and discussion. He makes it clear the university is home to anyone who wishes to express their opinions, as long as that expression is done properly.

Many students were not thrilled with the contents of the visuals or the message being distributed by the group on campus. The topic at hand, anti-abortion, is bound to be a sensitive one no matter where the conversation is held or the manner in which it is held. Bringing it onto a college campus by a group seeking controversy and conflict was particularly troubling and led many to question the administration allowing them on campus.

The message the images sent was strong, as were the emotions they potentially could spark. Yet the university’s willingness to allow them on campus is something students should be celebrating. The Center for Bio-ethical Reform has every right to be on this campus the same way a pro-choice group does, the same way any religious group does, the same way any student seeking to vocalize their opinion does.

In a time when free speech is receiving pushback from the president and his administration, the fact our administration is honoring it should be celebrated. Yet despite this, there’s still more to be done.

If the university aims to promote heightened awareness and civil expression, both sides need to have firm groundwork. It shouldn’t be acceptable to bait passerby students through verbal attacks and provocations, as was the case at times Wednesday. Protesting is one thing, but using unneeded explicit language toward university passerby is another entirely.

Students should feel safe when walking to and from classes, and while physical violence is most commonly referenced, there still seems to be a disregard for verbal attacks. Green even seems to fixate toward a “physically safe environment” the university is striving for, which is a great start but not all encompassing. Where do we draw the line between free speech and escalating, non-physical actions? Wednesday’s group had every right to be on campus, but at times seemed to border on disregarding that privilege.

Yes, the visuals were graphic and possibly disturbing. Yes, the protesters sought aggressive engagement. Green’s email, sent Tuesday, made a point of noting exactly when and where the event was going to be held, so those not interested in engaging could simply avoid.

Whether it’s a pro-life or pro-choice demonstration, free speech is free speech.

Some of Wednesday’s images may have been needlessly graphic, but they shouldn’t detract from the bigger picture.

We need to protect free speech at all costs — it is what allows us to do what we do. Protecting free speech, in this case, may have come at a cost — but at least it was protected.

— Editorial Board