The freedom to speak is fundamental to a healthy society. Any attempt to silence that must be fought vigorously. The reason is a fundamental one. To get the grain the chaff must first be removed. There is always a lot more chaff than grain, but it is that grain that sustains us. This is true with speech as well. Speech is the expression of thought. Some thoughts are good, some are not, but it takes both to create a harvest. Discernment is the medium used to distinguish that chaff from the grain. You can't get the grain without having the entire plant!
We are all free to think whatever we like. Thoughts are private things. The right to share those thoughts with others is a fundamental one. Whether the others listen or not is up to them. Understand though that when expressing those thoughts, you give rise to emotion. Emotions are great motivators but seldom good guides. For that reason, we should exercise discretion in our speech. It's not a restriction in speech, it's an understanding of human nature. We should be equally aware that emotions may lead others to action. The actions may be favorable to our position or in opposition. One should consider carefully their choice of words, their means of expression before speaking. Expressing an idea shouldn't be found offensive to others, expressing an ideology most likely will. Now that being established, I still fully support your freedom of speech, you can say whatever you like. Your responsibility is to accept the consequences of whatever it is you are saying.
In our judicial system we don't have different degrees of guilt, we have different degrees of punishment for guilt. It's an area that is easily confused and misunderstood. Jay walking and committing first degree murder are not equal crimes but you can be equally as guilty of either. It is only the degree of punishment assigned that differentiates the two actions. Premeditated murder is the worst kind, isn't that what the law says. Yes it does, and there are second and third degree murders as well. Regardless of what degree you are convicted of, you are still convicted of murder and as such, a murderer. That's how that works. Our judicial system also has provisions for a crime of passion. Just what is that? We most often think of a love spurned as a crime of passion, I expect simply because of the name. The legal definition is a crime committed in the "heat of passion" or in response to provocation, as opposed to a crime that was premeditated or deliberated. Isn't that the same thing as saying the crime was motivated by emotion?
In recent years the term hate speech has been instituted accompanied by legal punishments for hate speech. I'd say that was the same thing as a crime of passion. If you said something to provoke that response, that emotion, it's partly your fault. Isn't that the thinking with crimes of passion. If I shot some guy for being with my wife I'm justified, sorta. Well, in the eye of the law it's understandable anyway. There are provisions in the punishment phase for that. You didn't ask for it. That's the thought process. You can say whatever you like but be aware that you are also responsible for the reaction to that statement. Depending upon the manner in which you express yourself, you may be asking for it. We all know when we are just asking for it, that's why we say it in the first place. We don't need a law to tell us that. Freedom of speech does come with a responsibility. Speech is the vehicle of thought. You are responsible for where the vehicle goes. That is your responsibility. Drive down the wrong road and you just might find yourself in the wrong neighborhood. That's on you, not the people in the neighborhood. My suggestion is to apologize, be polite, and ask for directions. Or better yet, don't go down that road at all. Just remember, when exercising your freedom of speech be careful what you are asking for, you just might get it. You asked for it!
So, you asked for it! Case dismissed.
No comments:
Post a Comment