The free speech law was created to urge pluralism and acceptability from the general public in order to bring them together . The law also exists to free people from the fear of speaking openly about controversies and their views on sects, sects and authoritative organizations responsible for regulating general public regulations. This in return would eliminate misunderstandings and confusions among people and bring them closer to each other. Although this was the idea not understood by many, and people have claimed that groups or people are racist, sexist or bigoted. To give people a clear picture of the privilege of free speech, the American Civil Liberty Union (ACLU) steps in. The article “Hate Speech on Campus” created by the ACLU focuses on free speech and opposes the idea of ​​speech codes in academia. The article is based on what the ACLU approves of when talking about free speech and what it disapproves of, which is clarified through commonly raised questions about the ACLU along with the answers. The article is very informative and has managed to convey the precise idea of ​​free speech in academia. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essayThe American Civil Liberty Union (ACLU) is a non-profit organization founded in 1920. Since then, nearly 100 years of tireless work have passed that the ACLU has dedicated itself to. The ACLU has been dedicated to defending and preserving public rights such as First Amendment rights, equal protection under the law, right to due process, and right to privacy, etc. The ACLU works for everyone equally, regardless of their sexual orientation, color, religion or mentality. or physical conditions. The ACLU not only works to protect people who are not afforded their due rights, but goes further by educating the general public about what their rights are and what they really mean. The idea of ​​preaching to people the real meaning of their rights is exactly what drives the article “Hate Speech on Campus”. The article focuses on the First Amendment which talks about free speech for all. However, the ACLU tends to specifically target free speech in academia and why students should be encouraged to debate rather than banned from doing so. Furthermore, through the vast experience the ACLU has accumulated over an immense period of time, the ACLU explains why limiting free speech on campus is not a great idea. Additionally, the ACLU clears up any misunderstandings about their free speech agenda by answering a series of questions any reader might ask. While this article may obscure the kaleidoscope of liberty laws the ACLU works on, it is still enough to give a glimpse of what the ACLU's authority and work is. The article “Hate Speech on Campuses” focused its base on academia. While the article focuses on college campuses and the speech regulations established there, it begs the question of what their individual rights are and what exactly is permitted by the free speech granted to them. The article is very direct in defining the true meaning of free speech when it mentions “Regarding racist, sexist, and homophobic speech, the ACLU believes that more speech – not less – is the best revenge.” This makes it very clear to readers that the article, although it is about academia, is focused on the bigger picture of free speech. The article is captivating as the method of persuasion used in this article is not emotional reasoning butintellectual. The article causes people to think about disagreeing with the general public about who they think should not have the right to free speech. The general public thinks that racist, sexist, or any other type of speech that promotes bigotry should be silenced. However, the ACLU believes that “codes that punish bigoted speech only address the symptom: the problem itself is bigotry.” which is indeed correct and because they build on this idea in the article, the root cause is identified and described to people. Questions and quotes are the soul of this article, to which the article has done great justice. The beauty of this article is that it disagrees with what we usually accept is protected by the First Amendment, as when the ACLU writes: “Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life deserves to be dismissed. same constitutional protection as other speech because the right to free speech is indivisible: when one of us is denied this right, all of us are denied it.” One wonders what their rights actually mean, and such disturbing words arouse curiosity in readers , which is tempered by the explanation the ACLU provides later in the article The article itself is very informative, in-depth, and interesting, but the thing that would keep the reader fascinated and determined to read this article is the cohesive cognitive thought process. which the article is well built on. The article titled “Hate Speech on Campuses” is enough to understand what the rest of the article would be about. Even if it is not a question of "what", but of why, it is precisely the academic world identified and chosen that brings out the real perspective of what freedom of speech is. Any academic institution has the fundamental idea of ​​educating students. Education has the fundamental purpose of liberating people from ignorance. The reason the ACLU chose the topic to focus on is that if students were not given the opportunity to express their opinion, no matter how hurtful their words might be, the problem created by a misunderstanding or lack of awareness would not be resolved. The reason why the ACLU supports the idea of ​​fighting speech with speech and disapproves of speech codes on campuses is written in the article as “Speech codes are not the way to go on campuses, where all opinions they have the right to be heard, explored, supported or refuted. " In support of its thesis the ACLU gave the example of the University of Michigan and how in the space of 18 months 20 cases were filed by white students against blacks, which led to the punishment of a student. To safeguard the student rights the ACLU intervened and declared the code unconstitutional. Furthermore, the ACLU encourages the academic world to urge its students to speak freely even on the most controversial topics because it believes that bigotry resides in the mind and not in words. as the article states: “Banning bigoted speech will not end bigotry, although it may chill some of the cruder expressions. The mentality that produced the speech lives on and may even reassert itself in more virulent forms.” The ACLU supported this idea by stating that if students were not allowed to express their opinions, no matter how offensive they may be, they would continue to think that those ideas are private and as a result academia would lose the ability to educate its students about his misconceptions and ideologies. The ACLU reports the case of Brown University which expelled one of its students for shouting racist nicknames, to which the ACLU states that.