On warm Wednesday afternoons early in the Fall semester, a solitary man may be sighted standing in the middle of Missouri State University's campus. Alone except for a Bible and a handmade sign, the man begins spreading his message, and it is not one of love.

This man is "Christian" cult member, "Brother" Jeb, and his appearance never fails to draw a crowd. According to both his sign and his verbal message, no one outside of his specific cult is safe from eternal damnation. From Mormons to homosexuals, feminists to sports fans, and loving Christians to pot smokers, any students listening to this man will inevitably find themselves ridiculed and included in his extensive list of Hell-bound people groups.

Though his speech is vile and arguably violence-inciting, he is within his rights to stand there and spread his message of hate. Missouri State University is a public college campus, meaning that banning anyone from speaking their opinions would be a violation of their first amendment rights.

But the question then arises: would campuses benefit from having a "speech code" in order to minimize potentially harmful opinions, like Brother Jeb and his heinous speeches? (It's worth noting that Jeb's sign has the phrase "Hate crime laws take away your free speech", so we at least know where this man stands on the issue.)

There are certainly benefits to a speech code limiting hate speech on a college campus. First and foremost, a speech code would promote a safe, diverse, and inclusive learning environment dedicated to progressive thought and critical thinking. That is, after all, what college is all about. An obvious example of this would be banning racial epithets that could lead to violence.

It is a college's duty to provide a safe and equal learning experience for all students, which makes that ideal more important than certain words or phrases. It should also be noted that fighting words, or words deliberately spoken to incite violence, are an exception to first amendment protection.

The presence of a speech code on a college campus may have its cons as well. Opponents of a hate speech code argue that regulation of speech could hinder the truth-seeking process, which defeats the higher learning point of college campuses. Universities are supposed to be, after all, places for free exchange of ideas and thoughts. Plus, restriction of usable language could appear to begin the slippery slope toward censorship and, ultimately, totalitarianism.

This argument has been the subject of philosophical works and debates for decades. What do you think? Should public universities like Missouri State University adopt a set of speech codes?