Essay - A Gay Couple Walks Hand-in-hand Across Campus. A Man Driving...

A gay couple walks hand-in-hand across campus. A man driving by in a car sees them and shouts, "Fags!" A black student is working late at a local coffee shop. ***** professor from one of her classes comes in and tries to order a me*****l. She explains that the coffee ***** is closing. He ins*****ts, becomes more ***** more upset until he calls her a "*****" and a "nigger" *****nd stalks away.

Both the gay couple and the young woman have been subjected to extreme verbal abuse. But should the people who said these hateful things be punished? According to Thomas Grey's article, "Civil Rights Versus Civil Liberties: The Case of Discrimina*****ry Verbal Harassment," whether or not the speakers should pay a price f***** their words depends on whether ***** *****dopts a civil liberties point of view or ***** civil rights point of view.

The ***** liberties ***** of view holds ***** the speakers, though undeniably obnoxious, did not do any "real" harm. To punish them f***** their ***** would be a viol*****ti***** of ***** rights under the First Amendment.

The civil rights point of ***** disagrees. It holds that members of traditionally stigmatized and marginalized groups like African-Americans, women, and LBGTs (lesbian, bisexual, gay, and transgendered people) have a right to be free ***** ***** hostile environment. The ***** violated this right with *****ir hostile, harmful words; therefore, the speakers ***** face punishment.

Clearly, these are two diametrically opposed points of view. In the above mentioned article, Grey briefly outlines some of their major differences. These include disagreements about whether or not "psychic injury" is sufficient reason to curtail the right of free speech; differences in ideal realm of influence (public vs. private); differences in belief about whether or not any viewpoint is inc*****rect or invalid; ***** differences in focus (e.g., action vs. speech; consequences of speech *****. content of *****).

Perhaps the most obvious difference between ***** civil liberties proponents and the civil *****s ***** ***** ***** ***** civil liberties proponents think that words have a very limited *****bility to cause a tangible injury. The government, they argue, has no right or duty ***** protect people from being offended or getting their feelings hurt. Their philosophy, as explained by Grey, is the classic, "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never ***** me" (p. 339).

Civil rights proponents, however, believe that hateful words ***** inflict great harm, and that the term "hurt feelings" does *****t adequately address the agony endured by ***** groups. Civil rights proponents argue *****, just as one person's right to swing his or her arm stops at another person's nose, so the ***** of ***** per*****n to speak his or her mind stops when the ***** ***** person utters cause or are likely to cause psychic ***** to anot***** person. Or, as Grey explains, "[T]he civil-***** approach, ***** its roots in anti-discrimin*****ion law and social policy, is centrally concerned with injuries of stigma and humiliation to those ***** are the victims