Perhaps some middle ground opinion on the subject was expressed by others.
Some people have stated they believe people have free speech, but should not
say things that might inflame others or hurt their feelings. That view
maintains the individual has free speech but should self-restrict voicing
hurtful, inflammatory words that are known to incite violent behavior. I
believe that too; a person may have freedom to say something but perhaps
should not say it for a variety of reasons.
In America we have enjoyed a fairly well defined freedom of speech based on
the First Amendment to the United States Constitution: " Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free
exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or
the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the
Government for a redress of grievances."
That specific freedom has several elements. We are free to worship the way
we desire, and are free from being coerced into some kind of state-run
religion. Which means that we are tolerant of each person's preference in
the mode of worship. We exercise that freedom of worship, or not; it is our
choice. Accordingly, we are free to speak our mind in not only a verbal
fashion in conversation or speeches, but in making statements of belief that
we hold on a personal basis. It extends to what we write as well; not just
letters between family or friends, but what we put in print publically. Not
only that, the freedom extends to our joining together with others who might
agree with our positions of various freedoms. Lastly, we are free to make
petitions to the Government when we have a grievance and wish to be heard.
Therefore, when I am talking about the American freedom of speech, it takes
on a special meaning that has been rare in the history of the world; and is
rare in many parts of today's world. What I think the American freedom of
speech as afforded in our Constitution is "freedom to speak without fear of
retribution from the government." That is the reason the burning of the
American flag, redacting portions of the Holy Bible, Crucifixes sealed in a
jar of human urine are all repulsive and rejected by most reasonable people,
but it is still considered free speech in America. However, speaking out
against the repulsiveness of the content of that free speech is also
consider free speech in America. Rather than people being punished for the
content of their free speech, they should be persuaded by reasonable debate
to consider alternatives. Repression only allows the growth of
totalitarianism.
Actually everybody in the world has the freedom to speak any words that come
to mind, because, really, it is human nature. It is the yearning world-wide
to be free; but if you had lived in Nazi Germany in the 1930's you might
self-restrict that freedom to either speak against Gestapo brutality against
Jewish people, or for the humane and equal treatment of the Jewish people.
To speak out about those things would have likely brought the retribution of
death for each position. In the 1700's in the Colonies you were free to
speak your mind against the British King, but there was retribution for
doing so; sometimes even death. Our experiment in democracy has changed from
the rule of the king to the rule of for and by the people. The people
decided we should have freedom of speech without the fear of the government
coming after us for punishment.
[to top of second column] |
Obviously, in other parts of the world, that freedom is curtailed
by those who are in power and refuse to have anything spoken against
them. We fought a Revolution and World Wars to maintain that freedom
of speech without retribution from the government. We have grown to
believe it is a fundamental right that has been granted by God
through the gift of choice He has endowed through His Grace. Can we
abuse that right? Of course! But does it deserve the death penalty?
My belief is, No! At least not in this world.
Now we are at a crossroads in our experiment of democracy. We have
an Administration that seemingly by observing what is going on in
our current government, is using federal agencies to unleash their
power against ordinary citizens and organizations who hold different
viewpoints not in agreement with the thinking of the Executive
Branch of our government. We can list the alphabet agencies, NSA,
FBI, CIA, DOJ, EPA, IRS and others that have been granted the
authority to spy on citizens, punish citizens and organizations for
conservative beliefs and actions, place policies of tax burdens
against energy to destroy industries, place citizens in perpetual
debt, bring lawsuits against state officials for trying to uphold
the laws regarding illegal immigration, spying on foreign heads of
state and going after private news agencies and personal reporters
for broadcasting news counter to the liberal thought.
For sure, to the untrained eye and ordinary citizen, on the surface,
this seems like an abuse of power. A government elected official who
feels free to target political enemies, send the power and force of
a tax-funded government agency with its full force and power down on
a private citizen has overstepped his bounds and needs to be
checked. There is a balance of power between the three major
branches of government. When that balance of power is abused, it is
up to the other branches to bring those fracturing the balance back
in line with the Constitution. When we go far astray of compliance
with the Constitution we cease to be a Republic or Democracy. At
that point we become a totalitarian state run by despots and join
the other nations in the world who have violated their own people to
subjugate them into a form of slavery.
Our responsibility as good citizens of our Constitutional government
is to hold the elected and appointed government officials
accountable for the interest of the people. Freedoms are not simply
given by the government; they are "endowed by their Creator with
certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and
the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments
are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed."
[By JIM KILLEBREW]
Click here to respond to the editor about this
article. |