In “Protecting Freedom of Expression at Harvard,” in chapter two of Everything’s an Argument, Derek Bok writes, “One reason why the power of censorship is so dangerous is that it is extremely difficult to decide when a particular communication is offensive enough to warrant prohibition or to weigh the degree of offensiveness against the potential value of communication. If we begin to forbid flags, it is only a short step to prohibiting offensive speakers.” Do you agree with this statement? What is the writer’s stance in his essay? Does he argue effectively? Do you think his solutions are weak and in conflict with his stance? What about the last part of the above quote? Would you say it is a fallacy? If it is, which one is it and why?