FREEDOM OF SPEECH REMEMBERED (or THE MYTH OF “HATE SPEECH”)

 



    I remember, as a young teenager in the early sixties, going to Greenwich Village on weekends.

    In those days, almost every street corner had someone giving a speech: Communists, neo-Nazis, anarchists, cultists and conspiracy theorists all harangued passers-by with their slogans, catch-phrases and buzz-words.

    Looking back, it was an amazing phenomenon: they were offending almost everybody, but nobody contested their right to speak, even out in public.

    Why, you might be asking. Because the United States Constitution used to guarantee that freedom.

    “Used to?” Well, the language of the Constitution hasn't changed (though it seems there are people who want it to), but its effectiveness has been effectively neutralized in certain cases.

    As a Christian (yes, I admit it) I'm not a big fan of Voltaire. But he did say one thing I admire: “I disagree with everything you say, but would defend to the death your right to say it.” The American freedom of speech used to reflect this sentiment, and most Americans subscribed to it.

    Most intelligent people will understand this statement:

    Every expression

        of every position

            on every subject

                will offend somebody.

    If we're going to muzzle people because they're offending other people, the only consistent way to do that is to forbid everybody to say anything.

    But it's not that general. I'm offended by mindless obscenities, and especially when the Name of my Lord Jesus is used like it means the same thing. But if I tried to go to court over that, I'd hear a lot about their “freedom of expression” (though what they're expressing with those words isn't anything worth defending).

    No, there's a specific minority successfully muzzling the rest of us.

    The media and thought-police have accepted the term “hate speech” as something so horrible the Constitution doesn't protect it. People run the risk of being sued, fined or even jailed for indulging in it.

    But what exactly is “hate speech”? Is it hateful speech against any and every group or individual?

    Not hardly. There's only one group that's allowed to claim to be targets of hate speech: homosexuals.

    Now, I know I'm not homophobic (though I'll probably be accused of it). I don't want them to be beat up in the street or be deprived of valid civil rights. I have counted homosexuals among my friends. On occasion, they've displayed more integrity than many “straight” Christians I've known...myself included.

    But a line is crossed when people are jailed for reading the Bible in public, because it calls certain behavior sinful. The irony of that is that the Bible calls all of us “sinners”.

    Oh, and by the way: people are allowed to get up in auditoriums, nightclubs and theaters to say (and do!) all manner of obscene and blasphemous things. That's protected, even though it doesn't really express anything (or maybe because it doesn't).

    And, during “Gay Pride” parades, these behaviors and activities are openly displayed on streets across the nation.

    The bottom line of this Brave New America according to Newspeak:

    Nobody's allowed to express opposition to, or disagreement with, homosexuality.

    But it's open season on Christians.

    Conclusion:  "hate speech" is a myth designed to eliminate FREE speech.

    PS: Muslims are making similar moves in the UN...but that's another tirade.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

WHY THE NEW "DUNE" REMAKE IS DANGEROUS

  I read, and loved, the Frank Herbert Novel DUNE about 40 years ago.  I also watched the two different movies (the second a miniseries) with mixed feelings.  But when I watched this latest version, alarm bells went off.        The main character's title in the book and the earlier versions was "Maud 'Dib".  I forget what it meant.  But while watching this latest version, I couldn't help but notice that it was changed to "Mahdi".        "Mahdi" has a meaning outside the "Dune" franchise.  It's the tile of the Muslim Messiah; the one who will exterminate those who refuse to convert to Islam.         Muslims have a right to promote their faith in this country, however much I oppose it.  But when an established story is CHANGED to accommodate them, it's time to take notice.   As for Islam itself, my usual response to their challenges is this:  Islam came along over 6...
Read more

"Scientific Proof"

 " Scientific Proof" is that which is repeatable, demonstrable and observable. Period. In other words, the complete absence of transitional forms, and the millions of years required to make evolution at all believable, are outside the realm of science.  And yet, they have insisted on calling it science (and even saying "science" when they mean "evolution").  Their position was logically untenable, no matter how loudly and authoritatively they insisted on it.   When evolutionists finally realized that, they invented something called "historical science" as opposed to "operational science". Now they have a form of "science" that doesn't have to submit to experimentation and observation. Convenient, hmm?     Consider this quote from Ken Ham's excellent book SIX DAYS: "Men on the moon, airplanes, and the Internet all fall under the category of operational science -- none of this has anything to do with historical...
Read more
Image
 REACHING OUT     In the Book of Acts, all the Gospel preaching is done outside the churches, in marketplaces and where sinners were found.  Inside the church meetings, they were taught, and everyone was able to share something from the Lord. This concept was lost over the centuries.  "Reaching the lost" was reduced to "Come to church" where the Gospel was preached to a largely saved congregation, who remained largely untaught.       When churches are challenged to reach out, very few respond effectively.  That's why we now have so many "para-church ministries", and I'm certainly not against them.  After all, they're doing what we've all be told to do.       I once overheard two people reminiscing about Sunday School.  I asked what they were taught.  "We memorized the names of the Books of the Bible", they said.       "That's it?" I said, hoping to hear more.     ...
Read more