Listening to dissent is part of civil debate: #tellusatoday

Letter to the editor:

Commentary writer Glenn Reynolds bemoaned the level of discourse in today’s young people. His evidence? He cited recent situations at Yale and the University of Missouri, where vigorous student protests resulted in pressure for the university administration to act in a way that he felt harms healthy debate (“After Yale, Mizzou, raise the voting age — to 25”).

He may be right, but the solution is for him to vigorously make his case in the public forum and attempt to persuade. Instead, his solution was to take away the vote for those under 25.

As a lawyer, whose job is argument, and further as a professor of law, whose job is to teach reason and argument, Reynolds instead advocated the disenfranchisement of an entire group because some members of that group did not come to the same conclusion he did. And to do so at a time when there are concerted efforts to disenfranchise large segments of the population just boggles the mind.

In addition to this ongoing voter suppression, he appeared not to know the history of subjecting voters to “tests” of literacy and reasoning. Perhaps he should consider another line of work as well as re-evaluating his own competency as a voter.

Alan Migdall; North Potomac, Md.

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media

Comments from Facebook are edited for clarity and grammar:

When did doing what I say become the only proof of hearing another individual’s point? What about responding: I hear you and disagree with your point/solution?

Yale and University of Missouri activists seem so self-righteous that other options or opinions don’t register. Of course, saying anything against them becomes a slap against their causes. I’m not sure that their behavior is any different from the behavior of the targets of their anger. Does having a good cause exempt groups from civility or compromise?

— Eric Duchinsky

Implementing a maximum voting age would make more sense than raising the minimum.

— Steve Baker

We asked what our followers thought about some college campuses, such as Yale, being criticized for suppressing free speech. Comments from Twitter are edited for clarity and grammar:

Free speech is priceless. No academic institution should limit it. Those who ask that colleges do need to be educated.

— @FrankJCone

Free speech is nice, but it has its limits. Hate speech shouldn’t be tolerated.

— @Not_A_Rejcist

Yale is a private institution and has no requirement to protect free speech.

— @nosillacat

Students should take a book into their “safe space” and study how free speech works.

— @Webmaster_Rags

For more discussions, follow @USATOpinion or #tellusatoday.