1st Amendment

Freedom of speech. It's a simple concept, yet as a democratic republic (at least for now), we have so much difficulty with it. To many today, especially the generations who are so far removed from any tyrannical experiences, freedom of speech means, "the right to say whatever one wants until I don't like it."

On the most recent docket is David Letterman. His recent very offensive, distasteful, and classless remarks about Sara Palin, and especially her daughter, has outraged individuals from New York to Los Angeles. I just read an article where a New York politician is calling for CBS to fire Letterman for his comments ("New York Lawmaker Calls on CBS to Fire Letterman For Palin Comments" - Fox News). Basically, this congressman thinks that these hurtful and reckless words should not go unpunished and warrant censorship.

Here is my reaction to Letterman's humor, "Let's see here...channel four, yes there it is. Oh, there's Letterman. Hmmmm still ranting about George Bush. Still telling Chaney jokes when Joe Biden is a walking gaff machine...oh!!! What a horrible thing to say about a young mother...Where's the Wii controller? Here we go." Button pressed. Game selected. Time to save Princess Zelda.

I turn it off. I stop listening. While I think he has become less funny and more politically motivated over the past few years, he still has the right to say what he wants. He is paid for what he says. If society is offended, it will stop watching, and he will go away. If not, so be it. I choose not to listen.

Also recent in the news is the coverage of an 88-year-old psychopath who unleashed an episode of anti-Semetic violence at the US Holocost Museum in Washington, DC ("Guard dies after Holocost museum shooting" - MSNBC). In the same manner that gun-control proponents exploint tragic school shootings to demonize responsible legal gun owners; the press and politicians have been foaming at the mouth pointing fingers at "right-wing hate speech" ("On Hardball: Journalist Links Rush Limbaugh to Holocaust Museum Shooting" - Media Research Center).

Someone asked me recently what I thought about this horrible event and what the perp had said. I said that I didn't, that I don't give thought to the ramblings of the insane.

How people are painting this guy as religious right-wing is beyond me. The biggest problem with such an assessment is that the religious right is always being accused of supporting Israel and the Jews at the expense of the Palestinians. One of the most prolific anti-Semitic entities was the Nazi party, a left-wing socialist party.

Regardless, whether this nut was right-wing or left wing, his unstable and detached mind has nothing to do with the speech of others. It is a dangerous path to tread to target speech as the culprit behind sensless, unpredictable acts by the mentally ill. Hitler's words did not kill 6 million Jews. It was those who chose to follow Hitler's words that killed 6 million Jews.

Example #3: Carrie Prejean. When asked a direct question about California's Proposition 8 (gay marriage) she replied with a direct and honest answer. She replied, "...I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised" ("Timeline of the Carrie Prejean Controversy" - Fox News)

The gall!!! The nerve!!! What a barbarous opinion!!! Marriage between a MAN AND WOMAN??!!!

This is what is messed up. The cries went out from Los Angeles to New York to strip her of her Miss California crown. For what? For what she said. Free speech until I don't like it...

In 1919 the Supreme Court (Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr) introduced the concept of clear and present danger, that when speech can directly put the safety of others at risk (i.e., shouting "fire" at a movie theater), legal action could be taken ("Schenk v. United States" - Wikipedia). Unfortunately, what was originally meant to be a common sense interpretation of the Constitution has been bent to regulate the thoughts and ideas of the opposition.

In 1989, the Supreme Court hit a bulls eye protecting the concept of free speech. I must provide a caveat before proceeding: I think that flag-burning is detestable and an inexcusable form of disrespect for a great country. That said, Justice William Brennan, writing the majority opinion, made the following statement: "If there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable. . . " ("Texas v. Johnson" - Landmark Supreme Court Cases). In other words, freedom of speech means the right to say whatever, even when I don't like it.

Some Christians have sought to regulate pornographic internet content. Some politicians have sought to regulate talk radio. Some activists have attempted to restrict the political speech of powerful lobbyist. Some Muslims have threatened the lives of newspaper political cartoonists whose message offends their faith.

When Christians sense persecution, they claim violation of the 1st Amendment. The politicians constantly accuse the other side of suppressing the voice of the minority. Muslims cry out "intolerance" when a DOT says that a woman must remove her vale to have her driver's license picture taken. Everyone wants to express themselves freely; however, they are not willing to endure the expression of others when that message contends with their own beliefs and ideals.

The question is often asked, "why does God let bad things happen?" The answer is simple. If God intervened every time someone choose to do something "bad", we would no longer have free will. In order for His creation to have the ability to choose freely, logic says that "bad" things will happen.

In order to have free speech, logic says that horrible and hateful things will be said. To prevent them from being said is to prevent free speech. The co-existence of both is impossible: all good words and the 1st Amendment.

I have mentioned this before in this blog. I had a professor in college that said, "the problem with free speech is knowing who to listen to." Let them speak. The good, the bad, and the ugly. If you don't like it, don't listen.