Don Imus: First Amendment Abuser?

Sajo
Don Imus of Imus in the Morning, a nationally-syndicated radio show, has placed a huge foot in his mouth. On Wednesday, April 4, 2007, he went on the air and had the audacity to state that the women's basketball team at Rutgers University is a team of "nappy-headed hos." He said this after Bernard McGuirk, his executive producer, called the women's team a team of "hardcore hos." These references are unbelievable! I was outraged to hear such statements!

It is 2007, and prejudice in the form of racism, sexism, etc. is still rampant in the United States of America--supposedly one of the most developed countries in the world. How can we as Americans allow such nonsense to be echoed over the airwaves? We are continuing to perpetuate the stereotypes that other countries already have of us--insensitive, rude, and immature to name a few. I am not naive. I acknowledge that there are plenty of racists and sexists in this country, but should the public be subject to blatant prejudice displayed in the form of entertainment?! I think this is another example that proves that the First Amendment right to free speech needs to be revisited.

Lately, people in the public eye, celebrities if you will, have taken it upon themselves to make statements prior to thinking it appears. For example, back in February, Tim Hardaway, a former basketball star, went on a radio station and said, "You know, I hate gay people, so I let it be known. . . . It shouldn't be in the world or in the United States." He received a lot of harsh feedback for his remarks as did Don Imus for his remarks, and they both apologized. Although the two remarks were pertaining to different topics, the message is the same. Many people, public people, feel that free speech equates to the right to voice racism, sexism, classism, and whatever else-isms. This is not right.

I was not there when the First Amendment was written, but I do not believe that those who penned the amendment meant that "free" was to include all future offensive, crude, hurtful,etc. statements that are reverberated by the ignorant individuals of our time. In fact, I don't think their intent through use of the word "free" was to include any and every thing one can think to say. I do believe that just as they invoked great thoughtfulness and wisdom into creating the Amendments, they expected Americans to use care and tact before speaking to the masses.

Maybe it is time to consider an addendum to the First Amendment that takes into account our many other rights as Americans and references the Declaration of Independence. Here is a suggestion for language to possibly be included in that addendum: The people shall use free speech in such a manner as to not infringe on the "certain unalienable Rights" of others to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit Happiness." I may be an optimist, but respect for all is not too much to ask!

Published by Sajo

I am a proud mother. My children serve as my main motivation and inspiration to write and to continue creating a legacy through my writing.  View profile

1 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Scott Schlimmer4/19/2007

    Actually, it has been very well documented that the founders meant for the First Amendment to include "offensive, crude, and hurtful" speech. You say "many people, public people, feel that free speech equates to the right to voice racism, sexism, classism, and whatever else-isms." That's because it does. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.