Freedom of speech is among the most valued rights granted to citizens of the United States, but it is also one of the most frequently contended. When you are the one speaking, freedom of speech is a simple concept to support and is fervently defended, but the true measure of the value we place in freedom of speech can only be determined when someone else is speaking and we disagree.

This exact debate is currently raging across our nation—as is the right to peacefully assemble—as a result of a nationwide frustration with law enforcement as it relates to African Americans.

An additional aspect of the debate was recently brought to the University of Iowa campus when visiting Assistant Professor Serhat Tanyolacar placed a contentious piece of art on the Pentacrest—the University of Iowa equivalent of Iowa State University’s free-speech zone in front of Parks Library—without applying for or receiving the proper permissions to do so.

The work, which was composed of newspapers that detailed racial struggles ranging from riots to killings from the last century, took the form of a Ku Klux Klan robe standing seven feet tall. The work remained on display for less than four hours, but has caused a multitude of disagreements at the University of Iowa and indeed across the state.

While in my personal opinion, the work was misinterpreted—as I believe it was a show of support for those who feel their rights are repeatedly stamped upon by the government organizations—the mere form of the work obviously presented an unintended discomfort with a large number of students who saw it.

Now, being as I am a white, straight male living in the United States, I am fully aware of the societal privilege granted to me, despite never having requested it.

Therefore, I need to establish to the reader that I am in no way attempting to trivialize the impact that a terrorist organization—which is exactly what the Ku Klux Klan amounts to—has had on minority segments of our nation. I hold the necessity of the current national protests which are attempting to save African American lives to be self-evident.

I do not believe that the art was intended to cause any offense, but I also know that the result of an action matters far more than anyone’s initial intent.

In this situation, the artist is at fault in that he circumvented an established protocol, which deems that all displays on the Pentacrest must first acquire the permission of the university. While having to ask permission before speaking your mind may be a frustrating and flawed process to begin with, the process has been challenged and frequently upheld at the University of Iowa as well as many others, including Iowa State University.

Even while Tanyolacar’s piece was seen as hate speech by some, the American Civil Liberties Union says of free speech and its regulation at public universities that “the First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects speech no matter how offensive its content. Speech codes adopted by government-financed state colleges and universities amount to government censorship, in violation of the Constitution.”

The issue in the handling and regulation of hate speech, while a flaw at any university, including ours, is being played out on a much larger scale across the nation. It is no matter of debate that hate speech, such as the speech exhibited by groups like the Ku Klux Klan and the Westboro Baptist Church, drives decent, compassionate people to the end of their wits. In some instances it pushes even journalists to call for free speech limitations. However, regardless of our disagreement and discomfort, hate speech must not be regulated.

The concepts that protect hate the Westboro Baptist Church’s right to despicably protest and organize at funerals and social gathering are the same that protect our ability to speak out against them in turn and have our voices heard. Restriction of one form of speech, no matter how tempting it may be, creates a precedent for further restrictions. Instead, the response should be to rally back in support of the groups, which are targeted by the ignorant and the ill-informed.

We must use our own speech to show hate groups that their vision for the world is of the slimmest minority, but not by responding with hatred or violence as responding to an insult with an insult only perpetuates the argument.

Instead, I say to the targets of oppression, in all of its forms: I am not you, but I love you. This fight you wage to secure your basic rights as an American and more importantly as a human being will not be fought alone. I will not pretend to understand the hardships you have faced because I have never had the displeasure of experiencing them, but if you can’t breathe then I promise that I won’t either.