IS SPEECH REALLY FREE?

A recent article in the Detroit News titled: FREE SPEECH LIMITS NOT BLACK AND WHITE; Some offensive speech protected, some punished in the U.S. by David Lightman of the McClatchy Washington Bureau prompted to write something about a subject that has been rattling around my brain for some time now.

Lately, we have had a bunch of incidents where people said something that appeared offensive to our current culture. I say current because our culture has changed as to what type of speech is accepted and what type is not.

In this country we have a First Amendment right to FREEDOM OF SPEECH which we treasure highly as a founding principle of our country.

I have always been taught that not all speech is protected by the First Amendment and an example that has stayed with me throughout the years is “yelling FIRE in a crowded theater” just for the hell of it. I also remember the ACLU stating that even Nazis have a right to speak just as we have a right to speak against their speech.

Our Supreme Court has been asked on a number of occasions to “define” freedom of speech. Mainly the definition was needed to distinguish between “free speech” and “hate speech”. The court has tried to decide which type of speech is designed to “harm” as in intending to incite a riot and therefore is a “threat” to peace and well-being.

A lot of speech can offend but does not actually break the law as “actions” do. 

What speech offends us has changed through time and it is interesting, as the article points out, to gauge the new sensitivities to certain speech our society now possesses.

I think there is a propensity in our society to prohibit or limit speech we do not agree with. This I have seen in universities that historically have been havens where any and all speech was tolerated. 

To me, people do not have to go listen to a speech they may find offensive, but the speech should not be stopped from being given no matter how disgusting the subject matter. In cases like that, speech in opposition to that type of speech is what is called for and not banning a speech altogether.

Recently, a video appeared of a bunch of Oklahoma students singing a racially offensive song on a bus. They were fraternity students and as soon as the video went public the students were expelled and the fraternity banned from campus.

Yes the song was offensive and harkened to a time in our past that many of us thought was gone for good. The students insisted they were not racist as did their wealthy parents but yet they sang the song with gusto as if it was the most normal thing to do.

Watching the new generations, I am always impressed with the fact that among our young people, skin color/race does not appear to be an issue. I attribute that to us as parents making sure our children grew up color blind with no racist tendencies which after all, come from the parents; kids are not born racist.

Now because of incidents like the one in Oklahoma, I feel I must have been duped into thinking that things have changed when they have not at least in certain parts of the country.

Racism has always been associated with the poor and uneducated but in Oklahoma the students were children of the wealthy and supposedly educated members of society…so what gives?

As to freedom of speech…No they did not break any laws with their speech but they broke the unwritten laws of our current societal norms and as far as the university is concerned, the school is free to do what it deems proper for its reputation.

Ironically, their speech is protected and they had every right to sing that song but the words to that song exposed them as people that the university did not want on their campus.

I guess what I am saying is that I do not want anyone to feel that they cannot express themselves but if what they say makes people uneasy or mad than the person expressing himself must be prepared to be socially ostracized for the views and opinions stated.