The trouble with freedom is that it isn’t as picturesque as it seems. For my rights to be guaranteed that means a whole bunch of other peoples rights have to be granted to, and sometimes their idea of freedom of speech differs very much from my own. Yet our lives must coincide or we are restricting the freedoms of the other.
The trouble with freedom is that too many people paid too high a price for me to throw it away because I don’t agree with your opinions. Our ancestors fled Great Britain in part because of the extreme censorship placed upon the citizens by The Church of England and The Crown (the two were intricately intertwined). An erosion of their rights as British citizens led to a war in which at least 50,000 people died, and that was just the beginning of lives lost in the pursuit of freedom. I can directly trace my own ancestry to Col. Frederick Hambright, who was severely wounded in the Battle of Kings Mountain but did survive the war.
I have heard doctorate students question why someone can’t be arrested because they don’t like what someone else is saying, because it is offensive to them. This is frightening to me. Frightening because we have fought wars to get away from that type of government control. Frightening because they genuinely do not understand why we have certain freedoms protected. Frightening because everyday I become more certain they are not in the minority. Here's the deal, despite what you may have been taught, words are just words, they are not actions. That's why we have this saying "Actions speak louder than words." It is someone's actions that have the ability to cause physical harm. You simply cannot be prosecuted for saying something mean, or crass, or controversial. The argument made, as to why someone should and could be arrested based solely on their speech is this: "What if someone (person B) hears what they (person A) say and then decide to commit an act of violence." Well then person B is the one who can be charged with a crime. There are nuances of the law in which if it can be proven Person A was intending to incite violence he could face charges, but all in all "actions speak louder than words." We are all responsible for our own actions, and reactions, regardless of what someone else does or says. Person A may have said something completely revolting that I do not agree with but I do not have the right to silence him. I have the right not to listen. I have the right to involve him in a debate. I have the right to speak out against him. But I do not, and should not, have the right to silence him.
The trouble with freedom is that people see it as an either or situation. Either I get my way or it’s discrimination. Too many people have lived under a false sense of freedom for so long that when others start demanding freedom too it is seen as an attack on those who already have it. You see if one person's right infringes on another we must re-evaluate it. I have focused mostly on Freedom of Speech here because that is so often what I see under attack today but it is not the only one. If you don't like what someone has to say, or you don't like a company policy you have many ways to voice your opinion. For one, don't patronize their establishment. Don't purchase their products. Use your own words and speak out against them. But you do not, and should not, ever have the power to make that person or company bend to your will. So long as laws are not being broken every person is entitled to "certain unalienable rights" that cannot be taken away because of a difference of opinion. Just because something is legal does not make it inherently right or moral. For example it is legal to consume alcohol (once you reach 21) and yet consumption of alcohol leads to 88,000 deaths annually. It is the 3rd leading preventable cause of death in the United States. Someones speech may be abhorrent but that does no make it a crime. Conversely, just because it's not a crime does not make it the morally right thing to say. If we come to that level of censorship then we are erasing nearly 250 years of history. We are putting ourselves back into a dark age (not The Dark Ages, just a dark age). No, not all of that history is flattering but it is there for us to learn from, to grow from, and to continue moving forward.
Do you know which countries use government control to censor their citizens? North Korea. China. Cuba. I don't think I have to tell you that these are not the types of government we want to emulate. You may be thinking "I just want to stop people from saying things that are racist, or sexist" or some other -ist but the trouble with freedom is that you can't, because then you're not free. Like I said it's not always as picturesque as it sounds on paper but with all of it's flaws I still choose freedom over the alternatives.
These are my personal musings and you are in no way required to agree with them.
