Last Wednesday night I met with other members of WARN outside of the science center to chalk in support of the proposed animal testing choice policy. We had hoped to encourage people to think about this issue. After all, what harm can come from thinking about things? Yet, by one o’clock in the afternoon on Thursday, the majority of the chalkings had been erased by ac couple of Wesleyan students. The students claimed that they were exercising their freedom of speech. They could see no difference between my chalking and their erasing. A more commonly used term for this process is, I believe, CENSORSHIP. 

In case you missed the chalkings, they consisted of quotes from doctors speaking against animal testing, facts pertaining to specific drugs and animals, and other non-antagonistic
phrases. Also written multiple times was "Support a formal choice-policy for animal testing at Wes." I understand that not everyone agrees with the quote from Dr. Mayo claiming animal experimentation to be "barbaric." Yet regardless of one’s stance on the issue, there is no harm in knowing Dr. Mayo’s views.

I do not expect everyone to be against animal experimentation. I do expect, however, to have a forum to express my ideas. I thought by going to Wesleyan I would be free to speak my mind and have people appreciate my views. Controversial issues are everywhere at Wesleyan. They say: "Everybody has their cause." Right now, mine is animal testing and the instatement of a choice policy. Why should I be stifled? People should not be prevented from hearing the arguments on either side.

I have been extremely pleased with the recent Wespeaks from both sides of the animal experimentation issue. Such a debate is very healthy in that it encourages people to form their own opinions on the subject; hopefully the debate has also prompted people to seek more information before making up their minds. It would not be as upsetting to me if students promoted animal testing via more chalkings or more public debates. But the erasing and censoring of sensitive material as a method of disagreement is unacceptable. I was both angered and saddened by the fact that my views were so quickly stamped out. I am proud of myself for promoting an issue that I feel strongly about while allowing others an equal opportunity to be heard. To have seen my chalkings–my ideas, my emotions–rubbed out on the sidewalk greatly depresses me. I want to feel accepted and that there is a place for me and my views. No student should have to fear the censorship of his or her beliefs.