Above anything else that the governing documents give the citizens of this country is the freedom of speech. It’s the first amendment our founding fathers wrote, it’s the driving force behind our media, it’s the primary right that sets us apart from the countries we go to war with.
But is there a line that should be drawn?
Telling people to suppress their feelings defies the First Amendment, but should hate fall into that category? Should a superiority complex be protected by the First Amendment of a country priding itself on liberty and justice for all?
This is a hard line to tow, and it would take a lot to separate myself from my personal feelings to see both sides. While I don't claim my blog to be unbiased, I do try to see all angles. But today, I don’t think I’m going to tread lightly on the feelings of both sides of the argument. Instead, I am going to give my feelings, uncensored, as to what limits should be placed on our precious First Amendment right.
Hate is never acceptable. Plain and simple. And in spite of what some organizations believe, white supremacist groups in particular—being black, Jewish or liberal, and being pro-family and pro-American, are not mutually exclusive qualities.
Earlier this year, I interviewed an active member of the Ku Klux Klan for a story. I can say nothing bad about that man after our interview. He was polite, honest and open about his beliefs and his membership in the Klan. He stood behind his rhetoric that as a Klan member, he was protecting traditional American values and promoting whites’ rights. Despite his good manners, I think that man is wrong. Should he be required to keep to himself as a result of how he was raised? No. But what about the day after President Obama was elected and that man stood in full Klan garb on the side of a busy street protesting the president’s election? Was that okay? I don’t mean his anger at the election results, I mean wearing robes symbolic for most people as an outfit of hatred, death, superiority and racial intimidation. Should that be allowed? No.
The man who walked into the Holocaust museum yesterday and opened fire on innocent people working and visiting there, what are his rights? Are his freedoms more important than those of the people who were injured physically, emotionally and mentally? Could he have been stopped if the hateful message he had grown up with had been squashed?
It’s unreal to me that in this century people still hold onto the beliefs that events like the Holocaust did not happen. It disgusts me that people think because of their race, they are a step above the rest.
Freedom of speech is one thing, but it should not cover the freedom to hate.
I believe in the First Amendment. However, I also believe that freedom of speech should not include hatred, intimidation or terrorization. People who intentionally taunt others because of race, orientation, age or religion should not be tolerated by a country who welcomes all people with a plaque saying “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.” If we are going to let incidents like the one that happened yesterday, and let people who spread hateful messages like that live openly and publically, we should revise Lady Liberty’s welcome speech to say, “Well, unless you’re what we don’t want you be.”
But better than that, maybe we should take a lesson from our bronze goddess, and let her remind us why we’re here.
Sorry Lindsay, But I think you're making a judgement call based on the emotion of the moment.
ReplyDeleteI don't normally abide by slippery slope arguments, but in the case of free speech, I'd rather allow loony tunes like that Klan guy to have his say and stand on the corner looking like a moron for the world to see, than worry about the implications of defining "hate speech" and deciding whether it is or isn't protected expressive conduct. Because who gets to define it? And how might those legalities be used in the un-forseeable future?
Extreme right wingers are a real pain in the ass sometmes, and they sure can make you're blood boil, but when it comes down to it, they push the boundaries that expand the protections of the 1st Amendment more than any other group.
Frankly, I'm surprised you didn't mention Rush in this post. Lots of people think his rants about Obama every day are exactly the kind of inflammatory rhetoric that drives people like the museum shooter. Should he be silenced? It's one of those dark paths that are tempting to argue about in academic terms, but I'd shudder to see action actually taken.
I absolutely think Rush Limbaugh should be silenced, not because of his conservative views, but because of the way he presents them: in a hateful, hurtful, prick-ish tone. Nothing he says promotes productivity in our government or in our system. Nothing he says prompts people to take action on the main stage. Likewise, people spouting other hate-filled messages based on people's basic make up is not okay. I'm not even talking politically here...people choose to follow the theories of the left or the right. However, we do not choose our race, ethnicity, sexuality, body type, etc.
ReplyDeletePeople are pushing to pass anti-bullying laws in the Michigan Senate, so why don't more people stand up against these groups and say "YOU'RE WRONG, and we won't tolerate your BS." Because that's essentially what I think those groups are: bullies.
You know that I have no problem with people presenting their views, whether or not they align with mine. What I do have a problem with is people spouting hate while hiding behind "pro-America," "pro-family," religious arguments. At the end of the day, you don't have to be racist, anti-semitic, anti-gay or ultra-conservative to be those things (and I should clarify for other readers that I am not suggesting all ultra-conservatives fall into those other categories, either).
You are right, though, it's a slippery slope. But my feelings are not based in the "emotion of the moment." I've always felt that everyone's view should be respected, provided their being respectful in presenting it. After all, I did give that KKK member fair representation in the article I wrote about the flyer. You and I looked at it differently, but I think the story turned out great.
If people want a chance to speak, they need to do so respectfully. Because I can respect any viewpoint that is made in an intelligent manner. What I can't handle, and don't think I'll ever learn to accept, is ignorance guiding decisions and hate steering actions.