Why Is Liberty Important In A Just Society?

This Court’s adherence to the maximization of the rights enumerated in the The Bill of Rights for the people of the United States, is in connection to the core democratic ideals embedded within its creed: liberty, equality, fraternity, and individuality. The government’s role is to enable the individual to achieve maximum potential, in his own uniqueness, as it pertains to these four elements, while maintaining social order. Although, it is pivotal that we find a balance between the four elements, because, we have placed large emphasis on the element of liberty as a society, we must too emphasize that there can be no invalid infringement or misuse of liberty—ensured by a just society on the basis of law. Upon suspension from the university …show more content…
James Madison emphasized that the denial of expressing political speech should cause “universal alarm”, since through it we enforce government accountability, asserting that, “free communication, is the only effectual guardian of every other right” (“The Report of 1800”). Manifested by his establishment of a conservative protest group, a weekly campus newspaper, and organizing “ask-ins” to challenge campus organizations, Keller was concerned with the expression and pursuit of his political values, and showed no intent to harm his peers. The Court has previously and repeatedly upheld the importance of protecting political speech, even in schools. In Tinker v. De Moines it ruled that “in order for the State in the person of school officials to justify prohibition of a particular expression of opinion, it must be able to show that its action was caused by something more than the desire to avoid the accompanying discomfort and unpleasantness that always accompanies an unpopular viewpoint” (1969). More recently, in Snyder v. Phelps, it upheld the importance of political protests in public forums, ruling, “we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker. As a nation we have chosen a difference course—to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate” (2011). Keller’s magazine is a press related …show more content…
In the same manner that the majority of student on campus had the right to be heard in regards to their disapproval of Condoleezza Rice’s visit, the minority and the ability to express their views must too be protected. If we set the maxim for equality to be the equal opportunity for one’s voice to be heard, and in line with John Stuart Mill, the maxim for liberty consisting of doing what one reasonably desires without harming others, then the protection of minority interests is required to maximize liberty and equality. You maximize freedom to promote individuality through the equal opportunity to both, express and be heard. Because Keller is clearly going against prominent norms, he argues that the university is pressing their liberal agenda through the use of ‘tyranny of majority’. However, the university evidently seeks to promote a harmonious environment and was impelled towards disciplinary action after communal input. But as previously considered, the argument of comfortability does not outweigh his right to political speech, nor is there enough evidence to support the argument of inappropriate belligerent behavior. Although I may not share the same political views as Mr. Keller, it is his constitutional right to equally take part in the public forum for political discussion, and fulfill this Nation’s democratic