Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.

In a rare display of a clear, non-prejudicial statement, the Reverend Jesse Jackson, on the forefront of the "Kramer" controversy, is calling upon all people, not just whites, to stop using the "n" word.  In that, he is entirely correct, and I started to stand and cheer as he raced down the sidelines to what seemed to be a sure winning touchdown.

But like the buffoon he is, Jackson forgot to score before celebrating, and instead spiked the ball on the one yard line with his other comment:

Asked about free-speech issues, Jackson said the word is "unprotected."

No, Jesse.  It is not unprotected!  And you could not be more wrong!  For while the word is abhorant to most civilized people, banning a word is another step down the slippery slope to New Speak.  We can agree that the "n" word is not a nice word, and yes very perjorative, but as a nation dedicated to the concept of Freedom of Speech, no words can be unprotected.  For to start that process we only enslave ourselves to the whims and fashions of a new master - the word police.

Our ancestors fought hard for this land to be a free country where all men can speak as they see fit.  A lot of blood was shed first to rid ourselves of the yoke of imperialism, and then the tyranny of slavery.  To start unprotecting speech, no matter how noble the starting goal is, will only make us slaves to new masters.  And I for one will fight you every inch of the way to avoid that from happening.


Comments (Page 1)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Nov 28, 2006
For a second I thought I missed a hilarious football play. I was so pissed about the Giants that I didn't watch any last night or read the papers today.

But on topic, I wish I could spike him on the one yard line.
on Nov 28, 2006
lol... banning a word... and people think the war on drugs is futile.
on Nov 28, 2006

But on topic, I wish I could spike him on the one yard line.

Yea, I already did my rant about the Raiders.

But on topic again, just when you think he is going to stand up for what is right, he fumbles!

on Nov 28, 2006

lol... banning a word... and people think the war on drugs is futile.

Today one word, tomorrow a whole page from the dictionary.  I know Jackson has his own agenda, but I cant believe he is that stupid.

on Nov 28, 2006
Hi, Dr. Guy et al.

Did anyone look up "unprotected speech" as referenced by Jesse Jackon? You might want to take a look at Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, a 1942 case decided by the Supreme Court. The Court's decision reads:

"There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or "fighting" words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality."

So, what Jesse Jackson may have suggested is consistent with what has been US law for over 60 years.

Link for the decision: Link

on Nov 28, 2006

Reply By: Larry Kuperman

Thanks Larry.  But then yelling fire in a crowded theater is not the same as saying cracker or other offensive words. And while that case is not so narrowly defined, I would hope it is narrowed in future decisions.  Still, it is the first step to new speak.  So I bounce this back to you.

Who decides new speak?  Let us now decide the ultimate authority of new speak?

BTW:  While Star Decasis (sp - sorry) has a point in law, Dred Scott and others have been over turned as bad law.  And while this one has not on the basis of its merits, it has been whittled away in the last 60 years - with just cause.

Bad law is worse than no law.  Period.

on Nov 28, 2006
I understand that you feel differently about this kupe, but can you really imagine making a word illegal? Not like shouting fire in a crowded theater, but really making saying a particular word a crime?

Where would that leave our literature? Are you ready to have Tom Sawyer removed from Libraries because it offends people? Mein Kampf? Should educated people really ever be so afraid of a word that they can't tolerate its existence?

Where does it end? What happens when offending people becomes a crime? What happens when Sharpton again calls Jews "diamond merchants"? Will this just go for white people, or will the word 'niggah' have to be expunged from rap music, too?

I'd be willing to bet I wouldn't have to look to hard to find judgments that you believe to be activist in nature and that you disagree with. Not to be rude to you, and you know how much I respect you, but are you thinking about this from a universal perspective, or just the standard racist slurs? Do we really need to go back to the time when someone saying "a chink in his armor" provokes outrage from Chinese people?
on Nov 29, 2006
Jackson is a hypocrite. He thinks it's okay for him to make anti-semitic statements but anybody that makes even a moderately negative comment about "African/Americans" needs to pay restitution and apologize over and over until they're blue in the face.
on Nov 29, 2006
Someone should ask Jackson if the word "heime" or "cracker" is  "unprotected"... since he doesn't seem to mind those words at all.
on Nov 29, 2006
Counter-points:

1) Jackson never suggested making the word illegal, at least not in the article. Not even in the Fox version of the press conference. He called for a voluntary boycott.

2) In response to a question regarding free speech, Reverend Jackson pointed out quite accurately that not all speech is protected.

3) Has everyone seen Michael Richards outburst? It was bizarre to say the least. Have you all heard the "fork" part? Lets recap briefly. A washed up comedian was flopping in his act, he was heckled. He responded with an inflammatory outburst. The club should have gotten the hook and tossed him right then and there. That is not protected speech. Jesse Jackson called for a voluntary boycott of the "n-word" by media artists, specifically mentioning rappers and Black comedians. A reporter asked a hypothetical question and received an accurate response. Upon replay review, the call on the field is over-turned, touchdown!

Anybody have a link where Jesse Jackson called for making a word illegal?

Do we also know that Richards did an anti-Semitic monologue and then, via his agent, claimed to be Jewish? He's not, not by birth or by conversion. See Link for that story. The guy is just nuts.

This is a tempest in a tea-pot. Bad comedy is not a First Amendment right.

on Nov 29, 2006
And Ted is quite correct , too. In 1984, Jesse Jackson referred to New York as "Hymietown" and to Jews as "Hymies." That is not protected either and personally, I have never forgiven him.

Once again, no one is talking about making the word illegal. But we are not obligated to give these preachers of hate a podium. Say what you want privately, but I don't have to listen to it.
on Nov 29, 2006
1) Jackson never suggested making the word illegal, at least not in the article. Not even in the Fox version of the press conference. He called for a voluntary boycott.


Jackson stated the word was "unprotected". I never said anything about illegal. However, since freedom of speech is protected by the constitution, then "unprotecting" parts means they can be made illegal. (he also called for the boycott).

I have not seen Richards speech, but I have read transcripts, and he deserves whatever shunning he gets (I still think it is a mountain out of a molehill - after all he is not a policy maker, and the backlash is his penalty for his potty mouth). But to make it a crime what he did is to pervert the very concept of Freedom of speech.

I do not support the Aryan Nation, or the Neo Nazis, and would not even give them the time of day. But I will defend their right to be idiots. I dont want anyone telling me what "they" think is legal for me to think or say.
on Nov 29, 2006
Upon replay review, the call on the field is over-turned, touchdown!


Of course they would overturn it. I am a Raiders fan after all.

But there is another flag on the field. 15 yards against Jackson for excessive stupidity.
on Nov 29, 2006
Banning a word?...Heh, heh, heh...the idiocy is directly proportional to the impossibility. I understand the sentiment...but still, freedom of speech is...oh what do you call it...one of those rights we have. I don't use the 'n' word mainly because I don't really like it...much like the 'c' word for the ladies, it's a rather unattractive word in itself.

banning a word is another step down the slippery slope to New Speak.


Oh Big Brother, where art thou?

~Zoo

on Nov 29, 2006

Oh Big Brother, where art thou?

Mixing movies there?

3 Pages1 2 3