Free To Speak Or Free To Hate?

Some of us quieter, shy, and peaceful types of people like to keep our opinions to ourselves. We hate confrontation or arguing with anybody. On the other hand, some of us depend on our rights as citizens of the United States to speak our minds whenever and wherever we wish, no matter what the consequences are. Some countries don’t have these rights, you know. A number of these biased individuals, however, take it way too far. They take too much of an advantage on our freedoms and twist the words around to make it say what they want it to say. Burning buildings, insulting signs, destroyed flags, offensive logos, death threats – where do we draw the line? There needs to be a clearer restriction on our freedom of speech to prevent a potentially harmful or severe situation from occurring.

So what exactly is freedom of speech? Amendment I of the Bill of Rights states, "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech" (Smolla). Freedom of speech is defined as the right to state our thoughts and opinions without fear of punishment or persecution from the government. Freedom of speech is the most crucial right given by the Bill of Rights. If not for the freedom of speech, the other rights that are provided by the Constitution would be less valuable because we could not express our opinions about them. How could we have “the right to a fair trial” if we couldn’t defend ourselves by arguing and confrontation? Free speech is also the most appreciated amendment of all of the others. If the Bill of Rights did not promise freedom of speech, our lives would be completely different. Imagine your mouth being glued shut or having to have permission to say anything that you wanted to, no matter how little. Everyone would live in panic of being penalized just for conveying his or her own opinion.

Self expression is a necessity. Everyone needs to be able to express how they feel, their personal desires and ideas. Otherwise, we would all be the same. We would not be unique or be able to show the world what we can do and how we can change it for the better. It is simple to say that everyone has the right to say and do what they want, but it is just as easy to agree on reasons for limiting that freedom. No one would approve of the idea that anything, anyone says should be silenced only because it was disliked. Then again, we should all agree that it is not moral to hold up a sign saying “Kill Barack Obama!” no matter how much he may be disliked by that individual. The principle of free speech in theory appears so simple. Most would not argue in favor of restricting our rights to share our views. However, when it hits close to home, free speech restrictions can seem like a rational reaction to vulgar behavior.

In January 1999, Truong Van Tran, a Vietnamese immigrant and the owner of the Hi-Tek Video Store, had hung a poster of Ho Chi Minh in his window, along with the North Vietnamese flag. These symbols were a vivid reminder of the cruelty and horror that was enforced on them by Ho’s rule during the Vietnam War. As a result of the protests that had taken place outside of his store, a restraining order was sent out making Truong take down the poster and the flag. However, Supreme Court Judge Tam Nomoto overturned the order allowing Truong to re-hang them. Then, he was later attacked by a heated gang of protesters (cite, 76). While violence was the entirely wrong reaction, it was his own fault that he got attacked. What did he expect to happen when he put the flag and poster back up with a bunch of angry protesters watching? We should be able to share how we feel about certain issues, but not to the extent of causing, or threatening, violence or another issue, which is what Truong did. He caused violence by insisting on displaying something that hurt others.

Today, free speech is not only the freedom to speak, but also the freedom of expression. It is not only your words, but your actions that are sometimes protected by the Amendment. It represents not just what you say, but how you say it. Some of you might think that that means you have the right to say what you want, wear what you want, write what you want, read what you want, watch what you want, judge who you want, and offend who you want, right? Not exactly. Our words and self-expression can sometimes have harmful consequences. According to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent” (cite). Now, if there really was a fire, you are very much allowed to yell “fire!” However, as interpreted by Holmes, if there is not actually a fire and you yell “fire!” for the sole purpose of causing panic and confusion, then it is not protected by the First Amendment. Speaking your mind isn’t always fun and games. It can really cause some serious harm to someone or a crowd full of people.

Protesting, when done the right way, can really get the message out and accomplish wonderful things. It can persuade a nation to make the important changes that need to be made. For instance, Rosa Parks, known as “the woman who changed a nation”, stood up for the right to sit wherever she wanted on a bus in Montgomery, Alabama. She was tired of the treatment she and other African Americans been given every day of their lives, what with the racism, segregation, and Jim Crow laws of the time. She, and many, many others, only wanted the same freedoms that everyone else had. She did not cause disaster and there was no violence on her part. She just simply refused to get up and inspired others to do the same. As a result, she became an important symbol in the Civil Rights movement and inspired millions to help end segregation forever (cite).

But protests are not always this rewarding. Some cause more hardships and disasters than were there in the first place. In 1995 on a lovely spring morning, a rented truck was parked on the street just outside the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. A little while later, a gigantic blast coming from a bomb hidden in the truck shattered many windows around the area and set off a tremor that was felt from as far as thirty miles away. The major impact caused the front of the Murrah Building to be torn completely off and the many-storied building to collapse. Overall, 169 innocent lives were ended and many others were mutilated. Why, you ask? Two years prier to that very date, April 19, 1995, a government raid took place on a building belonging to a religious cult near Waco, Texas. At some point in the raid, the structure had caught fire killing the 80 people inside, including children. The bomb that was placed in front of the Murrah Federal Building was a protest for that earlier tragedy. However, this kind of protest did not make anything better. It just killed more than twice as many people as the incident they were protesting (cite). It caused way more harm than good, quite the opposite of Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott.

Freedom of speech is not only about sharing your own opinions and beliefs, but hearing other people’s viewpoints without being hateful and rude. Epictetus, a Greek philosopher, once said , “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak,” according to ThinkExist.com. However, some people don’t agree. Just this month a group of atheists in Olympia, Washington, decided to put up a sign in the Capitol building partly in response to a nearby nativity scene. The placard said: “Religion is but myth and superstition that hardens hearts and enslaves minds" (cite). The atheists had exercised their right to free speech even though they didn't have a holiday to celebrate or display. Instead, they used their freedom of speech to insult and put down everyone who did have a holiday. They saw other people's expressions of their opinions and instead of being thoughtful, open-minded and willing to accept their faith, they responded hatefully and insultingly. What some people don’t understand is that when you listen to others, then they are much more likely to listen to you. Therefore, allowing you to exercise you freedom of speech more usefully. After all, if everyone spoke and no one listened, what good is having the freedom to speak?

Despite all of the protests against limiting freedom of speech, you might be surprised to learn that almost half of all Americans think the First Amendment “goes too far” in the rights it guarantees. In fact, 74 percent of people mildly or strongly disagree that public school students "should be allowed to wear a T-shirt with a message or picture that others might find offensive." As well as 28 percent of people mildly or strongly disagree that "any group that wants to should be allowed to hold a rally for a cause or issue even if it may be offensive to others in the community" (cite). Many Americans feel that the boundaries that define what the First Amendment is protecting are not clear enough and need to be limited. The government's restrictions should limit speech that is going to limit other's speech, such as speech that is assertive and insulting enough that it might intimidate or force others into silence.

From constantly offending everyone to unnecessary, violent protests, something has to change. Not necessarily only with laws limiting our rights of free speech, but with us limiting it. Believe it or not, we all have the ability to control what we say and how we say it. Go out, speak your mind, and stand up for what you believe in, but do it in a manner that will be respected instead of causing violence or hate. If we would just stop and pay attention to what people have to say instead of speaking over it and not hearing a word but our own, this world would be a much better place to live in for all of us. Sometimes it is not just governments, but individuals who have to decide for themselves.