Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 20:36:58 -0400
From: J
Subject: Freedom of Speech is to protect speech that we find “nasty”
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Chatham Chatlist wrote:
> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:19:24 -0400
> From: Karen Crowell
> Subject: anonymity – a right or an excuse?
>
> “Protecting anonymity is necessary to induce some authors to contribute
> valuable information to the marketplace of ideas.”
>
> I don’t see how that applies to the nasty comments by “Whazup” that
> prompted this discussion in the first place. Nor do I think that hiding
> behind a pseudonym in order to be nasty should be considered defensible by
> the First Amendment.
>
> We can choose to be polite when we offer our opinions. We can choose to
> behave responsibly. It’s what distinguishes adults from children, maturity
> from immaturity.
>
> You, as chatlist moderator, can choose to raise the level of discourse on
> this list by asking us to acknowledge who we are when we provide
> unsubstantiated facts that are likely to engender opposition.
>
> Or you can encourage the childish taunts and insulting personal comments
> that have little of value to contribute to the marketplace of ideas.
>
> Karen Crowell
>
If that’s how you feel, then you completely missed the purpose of the Freedom of Speech protections defined in the First Amendment. The whole point of Freedom of Speech is to protect speech that we find “nasty”, “offensive”, or “distasteful”. Because all three of those (and many more reasons people have used to try, successfully or no, to limit free speech) are purely subjective measurements. So lets assume that you control
Freedom of Speech today, and you find Whazup’s comments to be distasteful and thus not defensible by the First Amendment. Next week, when I am in control of Freedom of Speech, I may find something YOU say distasteful or offensive and decide YOUR speech is not defensible by the First Amendment.
Perhaps this is a difficult point to grasp, but Freedom of Speech ceases to exist when “someone” starts banning the speech they find offensive, which may well be completely innocuous to many other people.
And please note that I’m one of those people who spoke up against the inflammatory and pointless comments posted by Whazup, but I will still stand for that persons RIGHT to speak his or her own opinions, regardless
of whether I find them offensive or not. I would expect the same from anyone who actually believes in the idea of Free Speech.
You have the Right to speak your mind, share your thoughts and opinions and take part in public discourse under your own name, a pseudonym, or anonymously as you choose regardless of whether or not those thoughts and opinions are offensive to someone, distasteful to others, go against the body politic or come across snarky, uneducated, or just in general poor taste. And I will defend your right to do so staunchly. You do not have the right to not be offended.