You Don't Have the Right to Not Be Offended
A Brief Review to Americans
Yes, I am completely serious - for fear of offending women, Australian Santas are asked to fundamentally change the history of a character to conform to modern interpretations of a slang word.
Meanwhile, a Louisiana lawmaker is being asked to resign because in a phone conversation, she said "See you later buckwheat" before hanging up the phone. Not only is this getting out of hand, the assumption that these things are racist or offensive to begin with, but the notion that anyone has a right to expect to not be offended is something that utterly flabbergasts me.
The idea isn't entirely native or isolated to the United States, however. The idea that we have an inalienable right to live in a protective bubble, free from offensive on our own terms has permeated to our sister nation of the United Kingdom as well, where Muslim leaders decried the Danish Muhammad cartoons, and on televised debates, 50% of the call-in audience supported the notion that people have a right to not be offended.
Of course, one's opinion on the matter is pretty much irrelevant, the question is a matter of legality and Constitutionality. Free speech is not stipulated as being inhibited in any way except when it is determined that the immediate usage of free speech would create a scenario that would result in an imminent danger. The Supreme Court defined this as "yelling fire in a crowded theater"
Nowhere is there a stipulation stating that if someone ruffles their nose and gets offended by what you say, you're not allowed to say it. That means that, no matter how much you dislike someone saying it, no matter how much it causes you to gasp, no matter how little you agree with them, they have the right to say it in all of their Constitutional glory. That KKK can say whatever they want, distort the Bible as much as they want, and hate Jews and Blacks as much as they want. That means that rappers can use vulgarities as much as they want, talk about rape and murder as much as they want, and glamorize the worst parts of our society as much as they want.
That means Muslims can continue to tell people that Jews are apes and pigs.
That means that the fringe group of liberals can say whatever they want about poor Justin Barker in Jena, Louisiana - and he had a right to say whatever he wanted. Amusingly, that also means I can say whatever I want about my ancestors who came to the New World with Christopher Columbus - yes, even Bartolome De Las Casas.
What you don't have a right to, however, is creating a bubble around you, and expecting others to conform based on that bubble. If you don't like what someone is saying, the rules since the school yard haven't changed much, just ignore them and go on with your life. You cannot allow simple words to have such power over you - the words nigger, kike, cracker, none of these actually mean anything until you let it mean something.
Though I don't truly believe that these words have power over the alleged victims - the power lies in those victims who can then use it against those who had the misfortune of using their right to free speech. Therefore, organizations such as the "Black community" (whatever that is that would rather try to spring six thugs out of prison that stop ethnic cleansing in Los Angeles) will never let the "n" word die.
Because, after all, it is the source of power over their enemies.
And that's downright disgusting.
Published by Chadd De Las Casas
I was born in Valencia, California in 1987. It's ironic that I turned out to be a writer, since my first exposure to it was an essay about why I hate writing. I am also the owner of the Content Producers Wiki. View profile
Merry Christmas to All, Whatever You BelieveIt's true there is a war on Christmas, but let's put it aside.- How to Not Be a Jerk at a Coffee House!Nick Gregory lets you in on more secrets guaranteed to net you better service at your favorite coffee house, and help you not come off as a total tool.
- A Different Point of ViewI believe our most fundamental right as human beings is the right to not be bothered if we don't want to be. I am somewhere in between a Goldwater Republican and a libertarian.
- Do We Have a Right to Public Prayer?When this country was founded many years ago, church and state were two things that went hand in hand.
Cell Phone Etiquette: Where NOT to Use a Cell PhoneA look at several places where using a cell phone should be frowned upon.
- Nursing in Public is Not Offensive: One Mother's Perspective
- New Constitutional Amendment Passed; Americans Have the Right Not to Be Offended
- The "N" Word and 20 Other Offensive Words
- Do Human Beings Have the Right to Offend?
- The Right to Be Offensive and the Need for Islamic Reform
- You Don't Have to Be Rich to Cast a Spell
- Ok, I Submit! Now Please Pass the Kool-Aid
32 Comments
Post a CommentBy the way, I'm way left, and I understand the concept of accepting the feedback that comes when you exercise free speech. There are always consequences for our words and actions, and you can't shout "free speech!" as a way to escape them.
Nice piece. I think it is good we remember this. You don't have the right to NOT be offended. You can be offended by anything you want, but you can't make someone not do it for the sake of you not being offended. That means you can't force people to say Happy Holidays, to take off pentacles or crosses, or to stop nursing a child in public. It means you can't make two gay people stop holding hands if you don't like it. It means I can't do anything about the hate truck with anti-homosexual slogan all over it or the abortion truck with pictures of aborted fetus on it that drives through my city. I have to deal with it. We have to deal with what offends us. We can ask that people be respectful of our feelings, but it is up to them whether they decide to be "courteous" You don't have some right to not be offended. Like I said, nice piece--a good reminder to us all.
RJT, spare us your stupid Leftist spittle. Are you having a twisted sister/reality distortion contest with Musall?
Get over it, Janet Shan, nobody hung any nooses. That was your liberal media taking lots of liberties with the facts.
Along with the right of free speech comes the responsiblity of accepting feedback--non-governmental feedback, mind you--for what you say. This is of course the fundamental thing that the Left does not comprehend.
(cont)
I do, however, want to know where that perspective came from.
Again, good article...I might not agree with you, but you never can have too much dialogue...
Interesting article, although I think the context of the events being written about needs to be brought into perspective a bit.
Chad, as good as this article is (and it is good; you make some pretty good points), I shudder to think that today's type of extremism is something that was intended when folks were sitting at the round table drawing the constitution up.
Sure, folks can say whatever they want to say...It's when those 'words' and 'thoughts' are manefested into actions (and in past instances, policies)that the line is blurred.
Before condeming person's right to be offended, think about why the issue is offensive to that demographic in the first place.
The reality is that we ALL have a really bad habit of trivializing the collective experiences of a race or ethnic group in this country, whether it be black folk, white folks, or otherwise.
As a black man, I didn't get a kick out of seeing Dog grovel on air; I don't think it was really necessary. I do, however, want
I completely agree with your article. Free speech isn't something that should be limited just because someone might get "offended" by it. No one has the right to limit another's freedom of speech just because their feelings get hurt by it. There are a lot worse crimes in the world than saying a "bad word" or "derogatory comment". Granted, I don't think derogatory comments are good, but it goes to show more about the one using them than otherwise. It also goes to show more about those who get up in arms over it as well, specifically those who try to limit freedom of speech so they can live in their bubbles. I wonder how they would feel if someone tried to censor them or punish them for their views. There's a very thin line between keeping a pleasant atmosphere (which, in the real world, doesn't always exist) and persecution for nothing.
I'm glad you wrote something about it.
Chadd, I have long felt the same way that you do. It seems like the same people that constantly cry "free speech" are offended when anyone else exercises theirs.
I have watched as Dog Chapman has groveled for weeks over something that he said in a private conversation. I feel like you do, they need to get over it.
Wow. Good article. Active responses. Right on!