Blog

#politics

#free-speech

Right to Not Be Offended

A major settlement of $80,000 was just granted to a local student who sued the college right up the road from where we live. Three fellow students saught out her social media presense and found posts they disagreed with about abortion, police, and more and filed no-contact orders through the school because they felt “harassed” and “discriminated against.” The school granted them without giving the accused graduate student a chance to defend herself. Now three professors will be taking mandatory free speech training and the school handbook will be updated to “ensure students with varying political, religious and ideological views are welcome in the art therapy program.”

As always, I’m glad to see courts uphold the constitutional rights of Conservatives, even if their beliefs are counter-cultural.

Seeking a no-contact order because you are offended is an abuse of no-contact orders. Seeking out the offensive material makes it even more so. Let’s just say I have some experience here. You are not required to read someone else’s social media posts, their personal blog, or anything else they do online. You can block and unfollow them.

Let me put it this way: you do not have a right to not be offended. That isn’t a right recognized by law or the constitution of the United States. However, others have a right to free speech. People are allowed to say things you disagree with. Folks are allowed to say things I disagree with. Their freedom and mine are intertwined. I cannot block their freedom without blocking my own. I can disagree with what they post and even respond publically to it, but I cannot run to the courts and remove their rights to post it.

Let us instead engage in debate and dialogue. If you are incapable of that— trust me, many are— you can go the other way. Don’t engage. There are plenty of topics that I have opinions on but am not capable of engaging in debate on. I don’t know enough or it actually isn’t worth the debate. It has taken me a very long time to get to this point, to know that not every hill is made for dying. To avoid appearing pugnacious, quarrelsome.

My rule typically is if an argument is not going to move a discussion forward or better our understanding of each other, it likely isn’t worth it. And that is okay. Disagreement and leaving disagreement alone is fine and healthy. Not all disagreement needs to fuel endless, fruitless debate.

However, the phrase has taken on a different sentiment as it is often worn by anti-Muslim protesters as a badge of honor during rallies and is seen by some as a provocation.

Mashable

Only Liberals could hail as art and brave a “painting” of Mary made of cow dung and pornagraphic images in one breath and scold those taunting jihadists— that are throwing gays off rooftops and selling young girls as sex slaves in ISIS— for being provocative in the next.

The reality is that this is no more provocative than the Coptics in Egypt tattooing crosses on their wrists or any Christian wearing a cross around their neck. It is a statement to the world that we are not afraid of death because Christ defeated it.

Those that love free speech stand by free speech. Those that you claim this hat tries to provoke are tired of a group of people using death threats— and killings, rapes, and more— to shut up the opposition. They are bravely facing down an enemy that is fearlessly tearing through the Middle East and you pansies are too afraid of offending anyone to speak the truth. It’s why I love George Orwell more and more.

In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.