Monday, September 24, 2012

WHAT IS THE COST OF FREE SPEECH?

A few weeks ago I wrote a blog on Free Speech and Judgment.  I do not find anything wrong with our Constitution for allowing us freedom of expression.  However, material things such as money, weapons, fists, verbal attacks made public and defaming one's character do not qualify in my mind as 'speech'. Just as we cannot yell "Fore!" in a theater because we have experienced too many deaths from people trying to flee small quarters, we need to also be aware that the US Supreme Cort which ruled that corporations are people and should be allowed (under freedom of speech) to pay whatever they wish toward campaign financing.  I realize that it is most likely someone (possibly Scalia, since he was the one who claims to have turned the vote to what it finally became) was somehow in the pocket of the Republicans or their surrogates.

It is my belief that Free Speech is not being interpreted as our Founding Fathers meant it to be.  It would be good to see time spent on reinterpreting exactly what is permissible under free speech.  Clearly, not everything should be.  In some instances, as the more recent film denigrating Islam's religion, he did nothing against our laws.  However, in view of past attitudes such as the jihad against  Salman Rushdie which has been ongoing for twenty three years.  Recently, as he has traveled in England and New York unguarded, the price on his head  has been reiterated.with a new price tag on  his death.

Within this article: 
"The producer of the film, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, is reportedly a Los Angeles-based 55-year-old Egyptian Copt and convicted fraudster, currently out on parole.
US media reports say Nakoula wrote and produced the film, using the pseudonym Sam Bacile before being identified. Police questioned him before he went into hiding with his family.?  Wikipedia describes this man in great detail.

While our speech may be free in our country, with the Internet and media coverage traveling around the world so quickly and so detailed,it is a wonder more have not been attacked for their offensiveness.  When our speech travels around the world it is subjected to other values and perceptions  We do not permit defamation of character and lewdness,  We have rules about what can be said on TV to young audiences or prime time. In fact, there are many things we are not allowed by law to say, much defined by work place and places of worship, and these places are where judgment comes in even though no law may be being broken. In WWII, it was common to hear "Loose lips sink ships.  Using one's judgment about the safety to others as well as ourselves should always be kept in mind.  We may have a right to free speech in the USA but not everywhere.. 


2 comments:

Frank J. Lhota said...

In a New York Times op-ed, Bill Keller uses Salmon Rushdie's recent memoir to make the case that our country should not sacrifice our free speech in the face of intimidation:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/24/opinion/keller-the-satanic-video.html

Frank J. Lhota said...

The Popehat blog has a post about why we should retire the "shouting fire in a crowded threater" anology:

http://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/