Free Speech or Respectful Speech?

On a number of occasions, my random discussions throughout the day have come across the subject of free speech. Coupled with any discussion of free speech is the question as to where to draw the line of limiting that speech. You cannot yell fire in a crowded movie theater, this is not protected speech. You cannot insight a riot, once again not protected speech. On two more recent occasions, the prospect of a conflict between our first amendment right to free speech, and the fourteenth amendment which has been used to protect against the various forms that hate crimes take. The question then lies, when free speech is on the brink of, or blatantly hate speech, should it be restricted? This question has come about with two specific scenarios, though it can be played out, I'm sure, in many different ways as well.

The first, with the exercise of free speech to promote a racial superiority, or to discriminate against an ethnic group. I will be among the first of those out there to speak out against racial bigotry. I don't believe that in the 21st century that there is any room for such arcane and destructive ideologies. However, should a group or individual that holds such hateful ideas be able to speak their mind, and be allowed a platform to do so? The second scenario presented, perhaps a more contemporary battle being fought (this is not to say that racism has died out, or has been pushed to the distant margins of society, but something should be said to the progress that has been made in terms of racial equality) The more contemporary battle has to do with the acceptance of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender community. Once again, I will be one of the first out there to stand up for my brothers and sisters of the LGBT community, but should speech against them be allowed?

A friend of mine, a fellow champion of equality in the world disagrees with my point of view on this issue, and I will admit part of what has driven me to consider this issue in such depth has a great deal to do with some of the very valid points that he has made. It is true that across the nation right now, perhaps the most discriminated against group of individuals are those who bravely come out and attempt to forge a path forward of acceptance for themselves and future generations to come. It is also true that with soaring rates of violence, intimidation, and suicide that this is a real and trying issue of our day. I believe it also true that with time, a lot of hard work, and battles fought and won, future generations of Americans will look back and find this generation that struggled with these issues so much and consider us backwards, narrow-minded, and foolish for our lack of openness and acceptance.

I recently was part in organizing an event titled "Blasphemy Rights Day" on my campus. Part of a broader series of events for "Free Speech Week". In organizing these events, we first came to these questions of whether there should be limitations to speech. An obvious concern, what to do - if anything - if someone, encouraged to exercise their right of free speech went down the path of hateful speech. With some disagreement, and also skepticism as to whether or not this scenario would actually play out, it was left alone. As it turned out, there were no issues with this at all, and the event went well. But the question still lies, should hateful speech be protected? And further, what constitutes hate speech? Obviously if I were to go rail against a group of people because of the color of their skin or their sexual identity, it should be consider hateful speech, but should it be restricted? Another scenario that I can imagine has to do with religious zealots of any faith threatening me with torture, fire, and scorn for the way that I choose to live my life. Some of my Christian friends will probably tell me that this is not hate speech, on the other hand, having chosen not to be a Christian myself, and being probably too familiar with Christian doctrine, I guarantee that when anyone makes attempts to "save my soul" they are engaging in hateful rhetoric toward me, those like myself, and people of other faiths. Should that speech be protected? How about political ideologies? Is it hateful for the tea-party fanatics to compare the president to Hitler? Is it hateful for people on the left to compare conservatives to fascists? The list goes on, and my fear is that eventually we will come to the point that speaking out against a poor corporate practice that goes against the well-being of a community, or a labor agreement that is detrimental to the economic environment will become considered hate speech to be restricted.

It is on this path of thought, that I cannot accept the idea that hate speech should be restricted. As vile as it often is, as terrible as some of the consequences may be, the fact of the matter is that freedom of speech should be one of the most closely guarded, and maintained freedoms that the people have earned. Freedom of speech can be used in terrible ways, but it also challenges people to think in new ways, to move forward, and to fight to make our society better. It's not always pleasant the things that we hear from opposing points of view, it's not always pleasant the things that the righteous have to say, but if we start limiting speech here, where do the restrictions stop? If I, in the fight for equality, justice, and humanity say things that offend those in positions to lose power, should I be restricted? Absolutely not, nor would I attempt to restrict the evil hate-mongers of our day from spewing their hate - as far as the law is concerned. I will, however exercise my right to free speech to speak out against these bigots with every chance I get. I will stand up to them, and show people the error of their ways with every chance I get. I will do everything in my power to make it so they have no audience for their hateful message, and will not stop until hatred, bigotry, and inequality are ancient myths of the past.

Your thoughts are encouraged. :)