system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Public Colleges That Prevent Free Speech Shouldn't be Eligible for Government Funding.

The 1st amendment protects free speech and expression. However, people will argue that the 1st amendment only protects you from the government censoring your opinion, not private organizations such as websites or private companies.

However, public colleges receive billions of dollars in funding from the state and federal governments. If taxpayer money is being used to fund these universities, their administration should be held to the same standards as the government.

One question might be "what criteria would you use to determine if a university fosters free speech?"

The answer is simple. You can kick out students that speak out in ways that are disruptive to learning. 

Some examples of ideally non-protected speech:

- screaming during a lecture or presentation

- pulling fire alarms to silence other's speech 

- verbally threatening others

- attempting to create fear through actions with no academic or political value(such as wearing a KKK uniform, holding a sign with the N word on it, and going around harassing African American students in order to make them feel unsafe).

Those things don't carry much value and just cause trouble and hurt the learning environment.

You can't kick students out for unpopular political opinions, "micro-aggressions", or any sort of structured speech that the moral majority disagrees with. As long as speech is provided in a civilized manner(arguments based on logic and statistics rather than personal/character attacks), a student shouldn't be able to get kicked out for it.


**TL;DR:**

If public universities receive government funding, they should be held accountable to the same standards the government does in regards to the constitution. If they don't want funding, then they can make their own rules.
gpt
> You can't kick students out for unpopular political opinions, "micro-aggressions", or any sort of structured speech that the moral majority disagrees with. As long as speech is provided in a civilized manner(arguments based on logic and statistics rather than personal/character attacks), a student shouldn't be able to get kicked out for it.

I know many people whose learning has been disrupted by microaggressions.  Your distinctions seem entirely arbitrary.  Why is a microaggression okay, but the sign with the n-word on it not okay?