Freedom of Speech
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Over on FaceBook, my feed has recently had a lot of talk about the First Amendment and freedom of speech and the right to peaceably assemble. (They are inextricably interwoven). There has been reference to a recent article which talks about how college students feel about freedom of speech, and whether certain types of speech should be protected. Unsurprisingly (at least to me), students who were members of groups that have often been on the receiving end of hate speech are less enamored of the absolute freedom of speech in the United States and would be interested in hate speech laws.
One FB friend had a post about protecting free speech and one of his other friends (not someone I know) commented that that was because the friend believed all speech was equally deserving of protection. It was done in such a way that I felt like the person commenting, like the college students mentioned above, did not feel all speech was equally deserving of protection.
I understand, emotionally, where these people are coming from. I do. It is incredibly damaging to be on the receiving end of hate speech. And it does create an environment where people do not feel safe. Please understand, I recognize this as a problem, but I do not recognize it as a problem that legally limiting speech will fix. In fact, I see it as a problem that legally limiting speech will make worse.
The problem with limiting free speech is the problem of who is in power. Even when we have a government that agrees with our personal political ideals, giving them the power to limit speech means that when we have a government that does not agree with our personal political ideals, they will also have the power to limit speech. This year, the Secret Service investigates you for saying you think Trump should be impeached. Next year, you receive a fine for arguing that Nancy Pelosi should step aside in favor of a more progressive Democrat. The following year, you are arrested for campaigning against Mitch McConnel. If we give any legislative body the power to make it illegal for the Nazis to have their parade this year, then next year, it will be illegal for Black Lives Matter to march. And the year after that, the Pride Parade is gone.
This is the government we have. And not just the current Congress, but throughout the history of our nation and the world, we have seen this pattern. So had the Founding Fathers and all the other leading thinkers of the Revolutionary period. This is exactly why the Constitution could not be ratified without the Bill of Rights. Much has changed in our world that the writers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights could not have foreseen. But the freedom of speech and the right to assemble have never been about technology. Those are about human nature, and the nature of governments run by humans.
The legal protection of free speech and assembly in this country must remain inviolate. Because once we start limiting those rights, what are the chances we will ever stop? And yes, this means that ALL speech is equally deserving of protection under the law. The government cannot arrest or fine the Westboro Baptist Church members for staging a protest outside of a soldier’s funeral. The government cannot shut down the publication and distribution of a Nazi newspaper.
But that is the government. That is the legal protection of speech. People cannot be jailed or ticketed by the government for speech. But legal protection does not mean that we, as a society, have to tolerate that speech. As a society, we are free to shun people who express opinions we find antithetical to our beliefs. Networks are allowed to cancel the show of someone who expresses political views the network does not agree with. Professional sports associations are allowed to fine players for speech both on the field/court and off, because those players are inherently associated with the league. A University is allowed to kick out a student whose behavior violates a school code of conduct. WE SHOULD DO THOSE THINGS. And conversely, we should also protest when people do those things, according to our beliefs and consciences.
We should also stand next to the group of bikers that places themselves between the mourning families and Westboro Baptist protestors. We should stand between Nazi groups and synagogues. We should escort women from the parking lot into the Planned Parenthood clinic. We should unfriend the person on FB who claims that blacks are the cause of racism.
In my day, back in the era of Nancy Regan’s War on Drugs, we always heard about peer pressure as a negative thing. Peer pressure was always what was going to make us try drugs. But peer pressure is exactly what we need. We need to let people know they will be shunned for acting on, or even expressing, certain ideas. They need to understand that, as a society, we will not tolerate certain behaviors, even if they are legal. We just have to understand that peer pressure, societal pressure, and legality are completely separate things.
We also have to remember that the First Amendment gives both the Nazis and Antifa the right to hold rallies right next to each other. It gives us the right to burn both Mitch McConnel and Nancy Pelosi in effigy. It does not give anyone the right to verbally assault the young, interracial couple on the bus. It does not give anyone the right to harass a woman in a burka walking down the street. Or tell someone wearing a Puerto Rico shirt to “Go back where they came from.” These are legal gray areas, but that is about the nature of threats and harassment, not free speech.
And just like we should stand against Westboro and the Nazis as groups, we should take a stand against these individuals. If you have the ability to step between the harasser and their victim (and feel safe doing so), you should take that step. Tell the harasser that their words and actions are not welcome. Be the peer pressure.
We are not going to fix the problem of hate speech in our country by restricting people’s right to speak and assemble. We are only going to stop it by stepping up and applying peer pressure on those who speak hate. Arresting them only turns them into martyrs. Instead, let people know that if they are at a Nazi rally, they will never again be welcome in your home. If they make a racist joke, tell them to leave your presence. Make it clear that you will not tolerate that kind of behavior. Make them pariahs. But do not give the police the power to arrest them for it.
As for me, I will be here, arguing every day that the Nazis have a right to print a newsletter and host a march. And also encouraging people to punch Nazis every chance they get.
