A yawn makes its way around the hall on a chilly spring afternoon at my Sixth Form as the physical presence in the room provides a deceptive cover for its almost non-existent mental counterpart.

“If you want to get high, you just do it, right?”

The question produces pockets of giggles around the hall, if only for its sheer openness. Yet, its importance lies in the simplicity of its logic; no one holds their hand up at a party to protest cannabis being smoked on the grounds that it’s illegal.

And this is the same line of reasoning that leads me to conclude that the decision to ban LSE Rugby Club on Monday was wrong. Yes, that’s right – I don’t think that it was right to ban the club which brought shame on the institution through allegedly homophobic, sexist and racist slurs.

My argument, obviously, isn’t based on the morality of the issue; I shouldn’t have to explain why homophobia is an ignorant and extremely harmful form of bullying which has absolutely no place in modern society. But will punishing anyone who expresses those views really extinguish the problem?

Such a solution isn’t restricted to the LSE – a few days ago, an email from the Senior Tutor at my college popped up in which he recites a resolution that was passed: “Racist, homophobic or heterosexist language... are already matters on which the College would take disciplinary action via the Dean. To this list it now formally adds language or terminology that is clearly misogynistic or sexist.”

Yet, this seems to tackle the symptom, rather than the core problem itself. Just as the speaker in Sixth Form implied, whether it’s illegal or not, those people (and I hope they are in the minority) are still going to hold those unattractive views. So, the key is to challenge the fundamentals of those attitudes – to expose them to ridicule and humiliation, and make people realise how daft the logic behind them really is. You can bet your bottom dollar that not many people, and certainly no-one at the University of Cambridge, wants to be laughed at, not with, for their views.

Instead, by banning such language, we give the misogynists power and imbue their words with too much respect. My argument, as counter-intuitive as it may seem, is that banning hateful speech is not a natural extension of these policies. In fact, it has the opposite effect from that which they are supposed to achieve. Rather, we must tackle to root of the problem.

Certainly, the idea of fighting hateful language through educational schemes has been thought of already. Of course it has: go into most schools or universities in the country and you will struggle to find one that does not post leaflets, hold group sessions and generally articulate a strong anti-hate message.

And it’s not just the ineffective nature of censorship that worries me. Even if the policy were to completely halt the expression of such views, publicly or otherwise, would the result be desirable? Fear of punishment does not equate to morally good actions – the crime is not being committed because it’s morally wrong, but because it’s a crime. There’s no progress in that.

What we are fundamentally doing is sowing the seeds of the war against our own freedom of speech: we don’t like what you’re saying, so we’ll not allow you to say it. It may be surprising to many that when infamous Holocaust denier, David Irving, was facing a jail sentence in Vienna, many journalists from over the world spoke out in his defence; not because they believed an inch of the drivel he exposed, but because they feared it would be a slippery slope. What next from here? Would criticism of religion start to lose the room it has to breathe, as is the case throughout the Middle East? It is not a far-fetched notion, given the lack of real support from many in senior positions during the Rushdie affair.

In the end, the choice is clear. We can carry on along our path of banning such comments, and deceive ourselves into believing that, just because these things are not being shouted in town halls or in the street anymore, the problem has gone. Or, we can move on, and focus our efforts on showing those vile ideas up for what they really are. Only then can we make progress.