Battle lines have been drawn. Already, activists, protesters, and free-thinking humanitarians across the world have vocalized their intention to RESIST the ill-founded and dangerous policies of President Dorrance Trump and the billionaires who bought his election.
While it is undoubtedly important to defend against the threats presented by our newfound government, it is just as vital that we proactively pursue the societal properties that precipitated the election of a baboon. Paramount among these latter concerns are the issues founded upon our First Amendment, namely, the Freedom of Speech.
Though not the primary concern of this article, Citizens United v. FEC determined that corporations retain the right to free speech and, thereby, may contribute financial influence into the systems that govern our rights. This fallacious use of circular reasoning spits in the faces of Cicero, Locke, Adams, Jefferson, and liberty herself, debunking any and all trust in the theorems of checks and balances. If nothing else, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Freedom of Speech flipped Montesquieu in his grave, deciding Separation of Powers remains legitimate even when there is no separation between money and power.
For this article’s purposes, another point of emphasis founded in the Freedom of Speech is in need of consideration: Hate Speech.
That’s right. Thank God for hate speech. Because God allows us to have Free Will, we have the freedom to hate. God wants us to hate evil things and evil people. God does not want us to tolerate evil, negotiate with evil, or make excuses for evil. Because when we do, we become evil ourselves. We enable it. Evil flourishes when good men fail to act.
Hate speech is freedom, and all the attempts to censor and ban and criminalize hate speech is an attempt to take away my freedom.
The writer of this excerpt had the audacity to denounce the use of a non sequitur earlier in his article, In Defense of Hate Speech. When advocating Hate Speech as a rational premise, it’s a good idea to check your own reasoning for logical fallacies.
First of all, the First Amendment’s “free exercise of religion” does not entail that “Because [your] God allows” something, it is a credible source; this is the fallacy of False Authority, using an expert of dubious credentials.
If you are tempted to argue this point, I will reference the deity of the Flying Spaghetti Monster who saucily proclaims, “You’re wrong.”
Secondly, “Free Will” as an argument represents Association fallacy; the argument for or against Hate Speech isn’t whether you can do it (Free Will), but, rather, whether you should do it (ethics).
Third, where, exactly, in the Constitution, is the definition of “evil?” Regardless, isn’t the whole point of total depravity that God can’t distinguish between sinners and evil? Wasn’t that the whole point of Jesus?
So, God tells you to hate evil… and you sin… therefore… you hate yourself.
Got it. I advise therapy.
And finally, “Evil flourishes when good men fail to act.” If you find an objective definition of evil, you will find that it flourishes anytime men convince themselves that they are infallibly good and when they choose to act on that egomania. Also, this is a Naturalistic fallacy, attempts to prove a claim about ethics by appealing to a definition of the term “good” in terms of God’s will.
“Hate speech is freedom, and all the attempts to censor and ban and criminalize hate speech is an attempt to take away my freedom.”
Ergo, Murder is freedom, and all the attempts to ban and criminalize murder are attempts to take away my freedom.
Yes, you have the freedom to speak your mind; yes, you have the freedom to voice your opinion.
No, you are not justified in hating whole classes of social minorities because you feel like appealing to your own prejudices.
Featured image via Wikipedia