Freedom of Speech on College Campuses

356 Ella Street,San Francisco 94143

07 July, 2021

Description

The article describes what happens in most colleges. Street preachers find the most visited place on campus. Among the fundamental rights professional letter writer provided by the constitution, the freedom of speech is perhaps the most significant. Every citizen is entitled to the freedom of speech, but it may be misused as one`s words can be insidious. Therefore, the speech should not in any way harm other people or incite to violence. It is this freedom that open-air preachers take advantage of; some people view their activity as harmful, while the rest might agree with their words. The open-air preachers address an audience with zeal and hope to encourage many to leave their ways and turn to God. The article by Hannah Bleau headlined. The Psychology of a Street Preacher attempts to elaborate the way a typical open-air preacher thinks. The author continues to describe what most, if not all, of the street preachers think. To be able to clearly understand what the author means, a critique of her article needs to be given. This essay evaluates the article by H. Bleau paying attention to the author`s claim, reasons, and evidence. The article describes what happens in most colleges. Street preachers find the most frequented place on campus and start addressing the audience with a zeal of how non-Christians and sinners go to hell. The argument brought forward by H. Bleau is that street preachers give speeches that do not correspond to Scripture, and core Christian values or beliefs. She takes a stern stand against the street preachers saying that their message is not very Christian. From the article, it is clear that the author might be biased towards the preacher that she met. Being a Christian, her upbringing might be different from the preacher`s as they take contrasting stands. From, Yes, I love God, to even saying that she is a Christian. Wooten agrees with the author that street preaching only disturbs people. She also believes that street preaching is what causes the media to be in some cases against Christianity. Her argument is that such preachers put Christianity in a bad light in the media. In most cases, it is not justified and only occurs since those preachers do not represent the majority of Christians. In the article, there are evidences that support her argument against street preachers. First, she states that God has an extravagant love for humanity. She supports her arguments quoting the Bible. She uses Roman 2:4 that states God is patient, tolerant, and wonderfully kind towards humanity. This argument shows that God loves humanity and, therefore, street preachers distort the image of God mentioning only Judgment and hell for sinners. Additionally, the quality of her argument is shown when she compares the way she, as a Christian, feels listening to any street preacher with what non-Christians must feel when they have to listen to the same message. According to Bleau, it was unpleasant to listen to the preacher since he spoke of a harsh and condemning God. She describes what non-Christians might have felt by asking the question: how did it make those who are not Christians feel? It is here that she talks about how the goodness of God is what results in the repentance of men, but not the harsh reality of eternal condemnation. According to Robertson, street preachers only attract attention instead of winning hearts. This argument is substantial since it proves that the street preachers have a different view of Christianity than that taught to other Christians. The author connects with the audience through several ways. One of the ways is through rhetorical questions. Rhetorical questions grab the attention of readers by making them think about the topic of discussion (Ober 145). According to Burns, rhetorical questions are among the known attention grabbers (18). Several questions have been used such as: How should non-Christians feel? Or do you want to know what God is like? Such questions offer a better understanding to the readers who never had such an experience. Additionally, they put the reader in the shoes of the author. This offers a different perspective when the reader reaches the end of the text. Although there might be many people sharing her ideas concerning Christianity, some members of the community may feel offended by her arguments. The most religious Christians, who share the same beliefs with the street preachers, can find the arguments, claims, and the reasons of the author offensive. The author openly criticizes the way street preachers talk about God. She says that the way that they talk about God distorts the image of God. Everyone has the freedom of speech, and the author, by criticizing the street preacher's beliefs, tries to infringe this right. As a result, some of the people sharing the same beliefs might get offended. In conclusion, the freedom of speech is enjoyed by everyone as per the constitution. However, one should not try to change other people`s attitudes convincing them that there is the only way. This right is to ensure that there are different opinions, which may not correspond to one another. The article by H. Bleau describes that the arguments made by street preachers are inconsistent with true Christian values, which is partly the case as there are different viewpoints. The author provides several evidences that support her argument, namely, she quotes Scripture. On the other hand, her stand on the matter is seen to be biased as it is limited by her Christian upbringing. As a result, it is observed to be offensive to the part of the population that share the same beliefs with the street preacher.