Skip to main content

To Hide Reality

Prior restraint has been an issue in the United States for a long time. In our book, prior restraint can be described as "stopping a message before it is communicated" (Tedford and Herbeck, Pg. 245) The way that I take this, individuals or groups are trying to "protect" us from reality. But really, how much "protection" is this really providing for us? By screening us from the truth, reality is skewed and it disables the public from consuming media that may even help to "culture" our society. Profanity, racism and the depiction of rape or sexual intercourse are all uncomfortable topics, but does that make them harmful to society? Why not use topics like these to perpetuate growth, rather than censoring reality from people.
Just recently, a school district in Memphis, Tennessee has banned the popular novel To Kill A Mocking Bird from its curriculum. After a few complaints from parents of students in the district, the school decided to cut the book out completely. The parents complained the book made their children feel uncomfortable, because of its description of rape and sexual intercourse, but more specifically the use of the "N-word" through the book. This school district decided to meet their demands, but at what cost? Education is hard. It isn't supposed to be comfortable all of the time, and all this does is soften the system. In an article by the national review Philip Devoe explains "But as a means by which humans achieve intellectual growth, education is necessarily often a painful experience. Eliminating the hard stuff eliminates the reality". I agree with Devoe, 100%. Just because something makes individuals feel uncomfortable, doesn't necessarily mean we should never talk about it. Just because we don't like something, doesn't mean we can change it, or erase it for that matter.

DeVoe, Philip H. “Why To Kill a Mockingbird Belongs in the Classroom.” National Review, National Review, 21 Oct. 2017, www.nationalreview.com/article/452963/biloxi-mississippi-school-district-bans-to-kill-mockingbird-harper-lee.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gamifying Citizenship

The historical context of freedom of speech is an extremely interesting one. Why is it that the concept of free speech has been an undying one and has span the history of human communication. Breaking free speech in to three traditional rationals makes the concept easier to understand and definitely makes sense. These three modes of freedom of speech are philosophical, political and individual. They are easy to distinct from one another and function in completely different ways. From a philosophical level, free speech is a device of truth. That if people are able to speak freely and let their ideas compete, "in the long run the truth will prevail" according to Tedford and Herbeck. I find this interesting, because in my mind, this is the most important facet of free speech. I say this, because I find free speech essential for any kind of societal advancements. If people are not allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas, or discredit others ideas, how is a society supp...
1 comment
Read more

Wedding Cake Court Case (make-up post)

Wedding cake court case involving a gay couple, Charlie Craig & David Mullins, and a cake baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to bake a wedding cake for the couple. Just all around, it's a tricky debate with many different angles due to the baker arguing on the grounds of the First Amendment---its protections for free speech and the free exercise of religion. In the end, I think it comes down to whether we consider baking a cake qualifies an exercise of freedom of expression. I would say that it depends on the situation/context of baking. If Mr. Phillips wants his cake baking to be categorized artistic expression that falls under free expression, he can just go bake a cake on his own. Only then when he's on his own private time does it qualify, but as soon as he offered his skills as a public service via his business, I'd argue he gave that right to expression up. Also, what's stopping other artisans/professional services to deny services? By Mr. Phillip's logic...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why is Freedom of Speech Important in a Democracy

While reading Chapter 15, I got the sense that the book was really coming full circle. In the first week of class, we established a meaning for freedom of speech and that shared meaning allowed us to navigate the classroom together as a classroom and a collective group. Creating a space that also involved mutual respect of opinons but encouraging difference in them as well. This brings me to an article I found about the importance of Freedom of Speech in a democracy. It is a basic human right to be able to express opinions and beliefs in our country. Although that is the main component, just like we established in class the first few weeks, in a government and democracy, Freedom of Speech also consists of the ability to listen to people with difference in opinions. In the article , editor Rachael  Jolly says, “ We are going through a time where people don’t want to be on a panel with people they disagree with. But we should feel comfortable being in a room with people who disagree ...
4 comments
Read more