Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Igel

(37,567 posts)
17. That's confusing freedom of speech with nihilism.
Sun Sep 22, 2013, 10:21 AM
Sep 2013

Nobody's going to arrest the guy. Thus the constitution is upheld. The 1st amendment is completely irrelevant because it regulates the government's response to speech.

Now, if you want to say that the Constitution requires that everybody be quiet and make no demands of others regardless of what they say, then DU would have much reduced traffic because most of DU is complaining and calling for action based on others' speech.

If a politician uses an ethnic slur, hey--it's guaranteed speech, nobody can call for any penalty. Right?

Offensive speech is protected from government action. However, it's not protected from societal action. Don't like offensive speech and make a stink, suddenly it makes your organization or business less attractive. So you do something about it--possibly short term, possibly long term. We'll just have to stay the course to find out who the winner is, won' we? Perhaps the university will rescind his suspension, perhaps they'll find some way to make his life unpleasant so he'll migrate elsewhere.

This is something that school teachers know full well. One teacher was fired for using the word "negro." Granted it was a Spanish class, and granted she was teaching colors--and insisted on brown-skinned people being called "moreno". Still, the very use of a word that caused offense to the uneducated and ignorant was sufficient grounds for her dismissal. But the publicity made the school look bad and to defend the student would have pitted administrators against angry parents.

In this case, though, it's somebody who expressed the wish that innocent kids be killed for their parents' views of the 2nd amendment over an incident that didn't directly involve him.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Blood is on the hands of all allied with the NRA. nt onehandle Sep 2013 #1
Tweeting is dangerous jakeXT Sep 2013 #2
Wishing death on a politician's children is too much obama2terms Sep 2013 #9
So the NRA is then definitely ANTI 1st Ammendment. Crunchy Frog Sep 2013 #3
You're right skydive forever Sep 2013 #4
Nonsense. Just because DU doesn't condone assassinating children of politicians doesn't make Bernardo de La Paz Sep 2013 #11
Wish for the death of children may be legal hack89 Sep 2013 #13
Wishing death disidoro01 Sep 2013 #5
Death threats sulphurdunn Sep 2013 #8
Not a death threat. Igel Sep 2013 #16
Well, I suppose sulphurdunn Sep 2013 #20
I think he was talking about the original post not the killing children one. BlueJazz Sep 2013 #28
I agree, blood is on the hands of the NRA. SecularMotion Sep 2013 #6
It was, but it's understandable primavera Sep 2013 #10
Which is why, in an age where the words enlightenment Sep 2013 #15
I guess this is Kansas,after all, Toto Android3.14 Sep 2013 #7
admendment mtasselin Sep 2013 #12
If that college backed the 1st Amendment like the NRA backs the 2nd,....... Paladin Sep 2013 #14
That's confusing freedom of speech with nihilism. Igel Sep 2013 #17
Pro-gun policy in this country has devolved to the point of full-scale nihilism. Paladin Sep 2013 #22
Arrest isn't the only concern though, right? UK is a public school, and so petronius Sep 2013 #24
truth hurts heaven05 Sep 2013 #18
30 pieces of silver. CincyDem Sep 2013 #19
I understand this journalism professor's anger mike dub Sep 2013 #21
"let it be YOUR sons and daughters." iandhr Sep 2013 #23
He's making a point that they might feel differently if their own children were killed. NutmegYankee Sep 2013 #26
Critical Reading is Critical! nt Cryptoad Sep 2013 #27
Isn't protecting one from government punishment for speech the whole point of the first amendment? NutmegYankee Sep 2013 #25
Remember James Brady? unterrified democrat Sep 2013 #29
Surely he regrets his phraseology. ronnie624 Sep 2013 #30
When was the last time Wayne LaPierre expressed concern for "the rights of others"? Paladin Sep 2013 #31
His wording guaranteed a ruckus. ronnie624 Sep 2013 #33
so terry bruce is appalled by a tweet - free speech - but apparently not enough by the murder by gun samsingh Sep 2013 #32
Don't forget this America where Luschnig Sep 2013 #34
Hi Major Nikon, pinto Sep 2013 #35
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Journalism prof placed on...»Reply #17