Warning: Political Rant
In the past month I've seen example after example of how our 1st Amendment rights only apply in certain situations. Censored language, blocked protests, and punishment for speaking one's mind seem to pop up on the news on a daily basis.
First off, the protests. The 1st clearly states that we have a right to freedom of assembly. Why is it that the government is allowed to enforce a restriction on this right by requiring permits for most protests? If I have a right to assemble with others who share my point of view how is it that a city or state can interfere and it is somehow legal?
Secondly, censorship. I understand that the general public does not want there to be rampant foul language, nudity, and violence (well, I guess violence isn't really censored) in the mainstream media, but does the government really have a right to penalize someone for using a word or showing some T&A? Somewhere along the line we let religious ideals amend the amendment to include exceptions.
Finally, persecution. There have been several stories in the past couple years about students being suspended, expelled, and in some cases prosecuted for comments they have made in various online media. I'm not talking about the ones who made threats on the lives of others, obviously when someone threatens to harm others there is sufficient reason to act to prevent violence. But when a student is punished for making a website critical of school administration during her own time, not on school grounds, there is something wrong. Expressing an opinion (even if it is something as juvenile as calling your principal a dickhead) certainly should not fall within the jurisdiction of the school. If the student said these things in class it would be different. When a teacher makes a rule against chewing gum, they certainly don't expect students to refrain from chewing gum at home. A student may have to act a certain way while in the school lunchroom, but the school does not make the rules for the family's dinner table.
As far as I can tell the only way to change these problematic attitudes towards our freedoms is to continue to challenge them. Pushing the envelope when it comes to the FCC, protesting whether or not the city council says it is ok, blogging about your teacher being a douche bag, these are all ways to keep people thinking about this issue. I'm not really sure where I plan on starting, but I know that I do not plan on censoring myself when it comes to something so basic as the freedom of speech.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree on most terms of you statements. I also feel the government has gotten to involved in defining people's morality. Morality is something to be taught by you personal beliefs usually from parents and is linked to religion. In my opinion if something doesn't harm another person in any way why/how can it be legal.
As far as protest goes, I know why they require the permit. It is to control the dangers of poorly ran impromptu protests/celebrations that MN has seen in the past. I think the city has the right to make at least 1 hoop for a group to jump through to protest legally because if a group is organized and prepared ahead of time getting the required permits shouldn't be hard. Now if a drunken bar crowd goes out during the convention and wants to make trouble they have a reason for arresting them and taking them off the streets, safety.
I think the true problem is the MN police departments acting rashly and usually escalating these situations causing mobs/groups to get unruly.
But of course that is all just my opinion.
Post a Comment