The school deans said Brashier was prohibited from “soliciting” her materials or even discussing concealed carry on campus. They even went so far as to order her to destroy all of her pamphlets.

Perhaps the CCAC deans need a refresher course in Constitutional law. It just so happens that pamphleteering is explicitly protected by the First Amendment. In the 1938 Supreme Court Case Lovell v. City of Griffin, the Court ruled that such activity fell under freedom of the press, writing:

The liberty of the press is not confined to newspapers and periodicals. It necessarily embraces pamphlets and leaflets. These indeed have been historic weapons in the defense of liberty, as the pamphlets of Thomas Paine and others in our own history abundantly attest. The press in its connotation comprehends every sort of publication which affords a vehicle of information and opinion.

I previously wrote about another student who was harassed by school officials and campus police after advocating for concealed carry in a speech class.

The idea that all students should willingly take a tuition hike so that the university can offer subsidized STD testing is abhorrent and truly furthers a type of “socialized” health care. Those who do not engage in risky behavior should not be forced to subsidize the actions of others. Additionally, the provision of the petition that deals with condoms appears to be mean-spirited and lazy. Condoms are readily accessible at convenience stores within 100 feet of campus. Rather than ask students to take some personal initiative, this petition asks Jesuits to provide free condoms, an action that goes against Humane Vitae (1968). We the students at Boston College, are so lazy and short-sighted that we ask others to violate non-negotiatable religious beliefs rather than walk 100 feet off campus. This says much about Boston College.

My hope is that the administration not only completely ignores this petition, but also publically explains why the movement should and will fail. The debate should center not over whether or not sexual health is important, but what the implications of this policy would be for chaste students and Jesuits.