Of Course You Have Freedom Of Speech . . . Now Be Quiet
Posted: Friday, August 20, 2010
by Michael Ramzy
delusionthread.com
Another humid and hot day in Texas and lately it seems there are more and more stories in the news about someone's (or some group's) right to speak being threatened. It seems to come in waves, actually, but lately there has been a lot said about a couple of very interesting stories which, ironically, have nothing to do with freedom of speech.
1) Dr. Laura Schlessinger. Until the other day I had never heard of this woman. I still don't really know much about her except that she is on the radio and gives advice. The other day she used the N-word (capitalization mine) several times to 'prove a point' to an African-American caller. She was called out on this by pretty much everyone on the planet, and her defense (if you would call it that) is that it is her right and that African-Americans call each other that all the time.
First, she is right in that she can say what she wants. As an article about this subject said the other day, 'speech is free, airtime is not'. So sure, she can say what she wants and if her advertisers bow to public pressure (which they probably would have), she is out of luck. Her right to speak was not threatened by the government, which is the only entity which could violate her First Amendment right. Her right to speak was threatened by advertisers.
Second, saying 'this group' or 'that group says it all the time' is not a defense, it is a cop out. I see people run red lights all the time (this is Austin, after all), yet that doesn't mean it's right.
And finally, those who come to her defense (such as Ms. Palin and Mr. Gingrich) have it backward. She is not being censured by the government (remember, the only entity which could violate her First Amendment right), she is being censured by the American people.
Those who come to her defense need to remember the 'freedom of speech' the Dixie Chicks enjoyed while on tour during Mr. Bush's tenure. You cannot have it both ways.
2) The Ground Zero Mosque. This one is prickly in that there is no First Amendment at stake here, and (ironically) there is no religious implication here either (even though everyone says there is). All the commotion about this mosque can be paraphrased into three separate statements.
a) They (Muslims) have some nerve rubbing 9/11 in our faces like that.
It might be easy to think that, if you think every Muslim on Earth wants to destroy the United States. It also might be easy to think if you think all Muslims are terrorists-in-training and this is just another way for them to spread 'hateful' Islam.
All I can say to that is, so what? So what if there are some Muslims connected to this Mosque who are not as 'moderate' as Americans would like? Is your neighbor moderate? Do you know what that guy down the street, the one who keeps to himself, thinks about America? You see, we cannot continue to classify people based on some percieved what-if, since if we did that no one would build anything anywhere and nothing would get done.
Sure, from the Muslim point of view the mosque might be a healing gesture, and from the American point of view it might be exceedingly insensitive, yet hurt feelings alone shouldn't stop it. Would it be better somewhere else? Many would say yes, but where? There are mosques throughout New York, so is three blocks different that five? Are we that petty?
b) They (Muslims) would never let us build a Mega-church over there since they aren't free like us.
Really? If that is the argument, great! We are the bastion of freedom, remember? We let people say and do things that makes our blood boil because we are free. Again, you can't have it both ways.
c) They (everyone) infringe on my Freedom of Speech when I speak out against the Mosque. Really? How do they do this, specifically? Do they turn away, or call you a moron (or worse)? That's not infringement, folks, that's just people disagreeing with you. You can shout it from the rooftops (or television, or radio) if you like, and if people don't agree with you then you must realize that is the nature of freedom. When the government comes and takes you off that roof, then you can talk about infringement.
Freedom of speech is alive and well. Everyone has it, although all of us can agree many would be best served if some chose not to use it.
This Article has been viewed 777 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (10 total)Using my freedom of speech, I say there is not harm in building a mosque where it is intended to be built.Agreed. Thanks for reading and commenting.
How many times can I give this article a High 5? Is there a higher rating than 5?I love how you incorporated every side in this and come out on top. Thank you for saying this.GraceThank you for reading and commenting. I appreciate it.
"Although I am as objective as I can be (usually), it's rather hard to be objective where stupidity reigns."Go Mike!
(Readers club)Thanks very much!
I love the way you leave nothing else to be said Michael, it's astounding. Please continue to enlighten us.Thanks very much. I appreciate it.
Hi Michael.As always, Michael, you present an enlightened and enlightening point of view. Great Job!Hugs,DianneThanks as always.
You've said it all, Michael. This is the sentence I like the most: "We are the bastion of freedom, remember? We let people say and do things that makes our blood boil because we are free"!It's amazing how often people forget that, too. Thanks for reading and commenting.
Well, as one of our Dallas Cowboys commented this week: "I am going to try and live right - because after being in Texas this summer... Hell is not an option" As for the muslims, they stand smiling in our faces while cursing our hearts!!!That might be true. And I respond with indifference. Why? Because hate is not an option. If 'they' curse us, so be it. We are who we are, and who are 'they' to make us change?
While I understand and even agree with much of your argument the problem that I have always found with this type of intellectual debate is the other debaters. What I mean by this is that while we can agree that you have put forth intelligent and elegant arguments towards the topics you have spoken about, there is always one thing lacking and that is that the people disagreeing with you may not abide by the rules of logic and reason and you must deal with them as well.I used to lived in Austin for many years, I still consider it home, but I would have to ask you, armed with truth and enlightenment would it be a good idea to walk down East 12th St., say around Comal, by yourself after mid-night on a Saturday morning? Of course not and if you did so I would have to question your good judgment. Realizing that doing something of that nature would be foolish and your defense instincts would keep you from committing such a blunder. Unfortunately, there are still many in this world that are willing to use violence and force to make a point and this is what defines terrorism in the first place.While I understand completely the idea that we are the bastion of freedom and allowing this mosque to be constructed only "proves" that point, I would like to ask a question of you and those pushing for this building. Why, if this building is to be built to help us all heal, are people pushing for the construction when they can obviously see the pain that people are still in with regards to 9/11? It may not be against any law and may eventually serve to show all around the globe that our constitutionally backed beliefs of government is the right way to go, but for now it just seems a bit insensitive by a group of people claiming to be concerned about healing wounds.You are right that hate is not an option, but what about common sense and common courtesy?Thanks for the comment. I agree there are still too many in this world who would (and do) use violence to prove a point, and those who decide to continue forward with this mosque, in spite of the opposition, perhaps have something else in mind. And yet, that should not be our concern because then we slide into the 'they do it so we'll do it too' mentality. Common courtesy from 'the other side' is usually non-existent, yet that shouldn't change us, should it? Take the war in Afghanistan: we try hard (some would say too hard) to prevent civilian casualties, while the other side attacks with abandon. Do we like it? Of course not. Do we wish we could take the gloves off? Probably. But is that who we are? No.Thanks again for the read and comments.
I understand that Dr. Laura is retiring and announced it since the episode you referenced. Great article - well written. I wrote a little ditty once "Talk is cheap some people say, but have they ever paid the price..." We often hear that "freedom isn't free" and those all came to mind while reading your piece.THANKS!Thanks to you. Freedom might not be free, but it shouldn't be expensive as people make it out to be. Thanks again.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.