“It’s hate speech!” “It’s free speech!”

Written by: rich^kolker on Jun 12, 2008 6:51 AM EDT

That dialog comes from a New York Time article this morning about a court case currently taking place north of the border.  The Canadian magazine, MacLeans, published an article arguing that the rise of Islam threatened Western values.  Had that article been published in the U.S., it would have clearly been protected speech under the first amendment, but Canada, and much of the rest of the world, has different rules.

There are some, even some progressives, who believe we are on the wrong side of this argument, that "hate speech" should not be protected.  That there are limits on how far political commentary may go.  This is dangerous and counter to everything this nation has stood for since its founding.

You could argue, and I do, that this nation was founded on what the establishment of that time considered "hate speech."  The government of George III tried to restrict speech against the King, using tools like the Stamp Act, but those restrictions were rejected.  The ultimate statement of that rejection was in the statement of July 4, 1776, in which, among other things, the King was called a tyrant.

It is on that foundation that the first amendment was written, stating that the government had no right to restrict freedom of speech, or of the press.  Since being added to the Constitution, that restriction on government has been challenged from time to time, and although it has sometimes been two steps forward and one back, the general trend has been toward more free speech, and not less.  That is how it should be.  The remedy for bad speech is more speech.  The ultimate statement of the American experiment is that in the marketplace of ideas, over time, good ideas will outshine bad, so long s the marketplace is kept fully open.

When we have strayed from those principles -- it has generally been out of fear.  But we are not a fearful people by nature.  As a PSA from the 1960's said, "We have to be taught, to hate and fear." We also need to be reassured and taught when those fears are goundless, and what the stakes really are if we give into those fears.

The first amendment isn't a good idea because it's in the Constitution, it's in the Constitution because it's a good idea.

The original article is at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/12hate.html?hp

Tags: