Skip to main content

Freedom of Speech Doesn't Mean Freedom From Repercussions, But People Should Still Be Allowed to Speak

It's a tad surreal to be involved in comedy during this time in our history. Comedians have, throughout history, consistently tried pushing the envelope as far as appropriateness goes. In yesteryear, if a joke went too far, they'd remove it from their routine, try something else, and the earth would continue to move. That was before the advent of the Internet and social media, however. As times has progressed, so too has the call for increased sensitivities to all demographics. Nowadays, if a joke goes too far, social media sites like Twitter attempt to temporarily stop the world as they try and put the comedian out of business. There's always been a fine line for comedians to walk down, but that line has progressively become longer and narrower, making it ever more difficult to keep one's balance.

So where do we draw the line? This isn't just limited to comedians. Is there a similar balancing act politically-correct free speech supporters can walk to help preserve our First Amendment rights while also standing up to bigotry? This juggling act appears to be one of the big challenges in the era of social media. While it's perfectly acceptable, even admirable, to consistently stand up to hate, having a one-size-fits-all mentality when it comes to offensive content and attempting to silence those you don't agree with may do more harm than good in the end. Isn't that one big reason Donald Trump got elected president? Millions felt silenced; he, for whatever reason, gave them a voice; and the walking, talking disaster known as Drumpf is now in the Oval Office as a result. Attempting to silence haters tends to only exacerbate their hatred, to the point where we have a sexual predator white supremacist in the White House. What is the right answer? I personally don't know, but we've tried the silence-them route before and look where that got us. Perhaps we need to try a different strategy. We can't change hearts and minds if we refuse to acknowledge and listen to them. While hatred should never be tolerated, it can't be ignored, for admission, not ignorance, of a problem is the first step to solving it. We can't solve a problem if we pretend it doesn't exist.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"