Justice Brandeis must have rolled in his grave three weeks ago.The April 30 removal of Lior Halperin's '09 "Voices of Palestine" exhibit from Goldfarb Library by administrators has caused a stir among students and faculty. The display-which featured paintings by 12- and 13-year-old Palestinians-caused controversy due to the sensitive nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The situation raises questions on two issues: the display's balance and the administration's censorship. From the short correspondence I had with Halperin and the various e-mails sent by President Jehuda Reinharz and the Office of Communications, it's clear that no one acted maliciously or deceitfully. While Brandeis should not have removed the art, the administration's decision is only the tip of a larger iceberg; there are other, more underlying issues on campus.

Brandeis is not the only school censoring student art, but that doesn't mean it's the right choice. A Pennsylvania State University student exhibit depicting acts of Palestinian terrorism was canceled by university officials, who later apologized. Artist Josh Stulman said his art was neither pro-Israeli nor pro-Palestinian, but I believe his school's administration interpreted it to be from the Israeli perspective. Stulman's exhibit would have been displayed at Brandeis with no problems, and I imagine Halperin's would have met little controversy at Penn State.

The juxtaposition of these two exhibits illuminates perfectly the conflict within the Brandeis community. With over half of Brandeis' students Jewish-many religious-there is a distinctly pro-Israel atmosphere on campus. But with the recent partnership with Al-Quds University and Jordanian Prince El Hassan bin Talal's speech at graduation, Brandeis officials are clearly trying to break this stereotype.

I am Jewish but also politically liberal, even regarding Israel, and find the campus very polarized. Many think that if someone is pro-Israel, he or she must agree with its policies all the time, and thus be against Halperin's exhibit. That's not true. Free speech protects everything, especially the disagreeable things.

As a private university, Brandeis is not bound by the First Amendment, but once Halperin was given room in the library and a professor approved of the project, it should not have been removed. Brandeis did not purposefully act to censor Halperin's message, but by responding to the complaints of the few she was silenced.

I fail to see what the why the drawings are so egregious. The images-a bloody dove caught in barbed wire or a snake coiled around a Star of David-are certainly jarring. But that does not mean they are overly inflammatory or anti-Semitic. The Star of David is not only a symbol of Judaism but also of Israel. Unlike the depiction of Mohammed in the Danish cartoons, the Star of David is also a political symbol that must be open for mockery, ridicule and political attack.

Many have expressed that the exhibit was not balanced. It is important in the greater scheme of things that Brandeis address and allow the discussion of all viewpoints regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But every event, speaker or art exhibit doesn't need to be balanced. Halperin had a specific goal-to humanize Palestinian youth-and even though she did not succeed in convincing every student of this does not mean she should have to present another perspective.

Brandeis prides itself on its (and its namesake's) tradition of protecting the rights and ideas of the unpopular. The best way to further academic discussion and intelligent debate is to allow all sides, even those that people find hurtful and offensive, and to uphold and support students' rights to free speech. There is a place and time for balanced presentations, but art exhibits are not one of them. The best way to handle upset and confused students and foster understanding is with more discussion, not less.