Thanks to national news, Valentine's Day this year will commemorate one of the most torrid love affairs in the history of modern American youth. I'm speaking, of course, about college students' perpetual romance with their right to free speech.The New York Times recently reported that the district attorney of Orange County, Calif. has pressed charges against a number of students at the University of California, Irvine for disrupting a speech given by Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren last February. The 11 students, all members of the Muslim Student Union at UC Irvine, used Oren's speech as an opportunity to protest what they saw as Israel's criminal actions against the Palestinian people and now face criminal sentences for their actions. The "Irvine 11," as they have come to be known, have rallied the sympathy of much of the faculty at UC Irvine, including 100 professors and administrators who have called for the dismissal of the charges against the students. Supporters of the protesters claim that the university's decision to suspend the Muslim Student Union for one half-semester was punishment enough.

This case raises several important issues regarding political life on college campuses and conflict between state and university authority. Even more interesting is the debate over the extent of students' rights to free speech and the university's obligation to protect them. In my opinion, students certainly have the right to object to statements made by speakers, but the Irvine 11 chose to express themselves in a manner that did not lead to any productive dialogue. This incident calls for a more thorough conversation on the exact nature of the right to free speech at the university in order to protect the best interests of students. I think it is helpful to compare the demonstration by the Irvine 11 to a recent protest here at Brandeis. When Noam Chomsky spoke at Brandeis last November, a group of students staged a silent walk-out in response to his comments. This sort of protest would have been a preferable alternative to the UC Irvine students' disruptive and disrespectful demonstration.

On the other hand, the protestors at UC Irvine booed, heckled and interjected Oren's speech with prewritten comments. Video footage of the protest, accessible on YouTube, proves that their comments were delivered out of context and were not a direct response to any of Oren's specific statements. Because of their continued disruption, Oren was forced to halt his speech. Other audience members lost the opportunity to hear what he had come to the university prepared to say. By this logic, it was the student protestors who are guilty of impeding on Oren's right to free speech.

The UC Irvine case complicates what is usually a romanticized picture of student's rights on college campuses. American universities have a rich tradition of serving as a persuasive and influential outlet for freedom of expression. The Vietnam era anti-war protests and the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s symbolize the best of youth protests and their potential to incite political change. The image of the Irvine 11, though, opens debate over the merits of silencing student protest that is aggressive and disruptive.

Undoubtedly, students deserve the right to express themselves on campus. However, we as college students have to break away from the glamorous image of the martyring protestor, who shouts catchy slogans of protest over the droning words of the enemy while campus police escorts him from the lecture hall. Students such as those at UC Irvine who see themselves as a lone voice of truth resort to methods of protest that are merely immature and lack content.

As a consequence, the effectiveness of student protests in general deteriorates when the the public begins to see protestors as agitators. This doesn't seem fair at all, especially to demonstrators like the Brandeis students last semester who chose alternative and nonbelligerent methods. Universities serve a purpose in public life to put forth new ideas. Student protest in its nature complements this role of the university by making sure student opinions are heard. I feel the ultimate goal of student protest, then, should be to enable the expression of as many different viewpoints as possible. Any demonstrators who use the banner of free speech to claim sanctuary from this responsibility ultimately discredit the right of individuals to free speech by abandoning its overall educational value.