I am curious-couldn't quite tell-what was printed in the paper? That you agreed with Wills? I have to agree with you regarding the left and right being so sensitive about PC and yet stomping on anyone who disagrees. We have that problem with some of our teachers at our high school-bright and intelligent but completely intolerant of anyone not in their political sphere-including their students-they shut them down if they disagree with them. I feel like some old conservative when I am not. I also believe in freedom of expression. Thanks for your comments. Tamara Hoffman Los Angeles High School On Sun, 10 Nov 2002 10:43:47 -0500 (EST) Louis_Schmier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We had what I would call a little PC spat on > my campus a couple of > weeks ago over what I might call in modern > technoligical parlance, a five > minute sound byte. It made the university > newspaper; it's is being > mumbled and grumbled about in the halls. It > reminded me, as I recently > told some people, that there are times I have > to agree with George Will's > statement that while our campuses may pride > themselves as sancutaries of > diversity, they are anything but sancutaries of > diversity of thought or > expression. > > Now, before I go any farther and get into > deeper trouble, > understand that I am what some would > call--perhaps brand or accuse--an > unabashed, unrepentant, card-carrying member of > the ACLU left over (pun > intended) liberal from the 60's and 70's. > > In that spirit, I am not particularly in love > with these "walk on > the surface of the water," self-appointed, "be > reasonable and only agree > with me" self-righteous guardians of our > freedom, these straightjacketing > moral legalists, these censoring legal > moralists, these silencing "speak > only what and as we say." These left-handed > and right-handed advocates of > political correctness--or in the wake of 9/11, > patriotic correctness-- in > their zealotry forget about one thing: the > first amendment in our sacred > Bill of Rights. It is the amendment that keeps > us free, the one that has > stood as the cornerstone of American democracy > for more than 200 years. > Aside from guaranteeing freedom of religion, > press, assembly and petition, > there's that other "little" protection "hidden" > in the first amendment. > It's called "Freedom of Speech." I've read, > thought about, practiced, > lived, discussed, fought for, defended, and > taught about the First > Amendment almost every day for many a decade. > If I've learned anything, > it is that the true test of being an advocate > of free speech is to defend > it when you think such speech is least > defensible, most unsupportable, > most offensive, and most detestable. Never > have I seen in that > amendment's eloquent terseness anything said > about convenient or > inconvenient speech, comfortable or > uncomfortable speech, appropriate or > inappropriate speech, patriotic or unpatriotic > speech, agreeable or > disagreeable speech, offensive or inoffensive > speech, troubling or > untroubling speech, acceptable or unacceptable > speech, minority or > majority speech. Were it to have imposed such > retricting and imprisoning > and subjective adjectives on speech, it would > be mere colorless glitter > and empty. Where would be the likes of those > proverbial movers and > shakers, those unsettling and disagreeable > speakers such as Frederick > Douglass, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Margaret > Sanger, Rosa Parks, Martin > Luther King, Sojourner Truth, Dorethea Dix, > David Thoreau, Eugene Debs, > Susan B. Anthony, Lenny Bruce, George Carlon, > Oliver North, Jesse Jackson, > and, yes, even the likes of David Dukes and > Jerry Falwell. How poorer > would we have been if we didn't have those who > got under our skin, pushed > our buttons, tweaked our noses, got us mad, > needled us, gave us pause to > reflect, and caused us to articulate. How much > farther would we be from > the ideals of American values . > > Again in my defense, I am an avid, almost > fanatical, opponent of > verbal violence. Whether we come from left or > right, we can be so hurtful > when we think we're so right. In Solomon it > says something about reckless > words pierce like a sharp sword. The ditty > "sticks and stones may hurt my > bones, but words will never harm me," might be > right and Solomon wrong, > and we might not have to be thoughtful, if all > people had thick inner > armor protecting their spirts from verbal > grenades. The reality is that > they don't. Yes, words can harm. They can > break our hearts and subdue > our spirits; they can destroy our dreams; they > can lessen our desire; they > can render us worthless; they can crush our > courage; they can douse our > flame. Negative, devlauing words like > "spastic," "fattie," "nerd," "dumb > blonde," "four eyes," "flat-chested," "shorty," > "chesty," "fag," "dummy," > "infidel," and worse can hurt. Vicious words, > bigoted words, can destroy. > Ask anyone who was and/or is ridiculed and > taunted because he or she is > Polish, Jewish, Liberal, Conservative, female, > Catholic, homosexual, > Irish, Oriental, Italian, African, Moslim, > Arab, etc. Ask anyone who is > the brunt of unkind words, tasteless personal > jokes, brutal nick names, > and shameless ridicule if these words ever lose > their sting. > > No, I don't think there is any deeper wound > than humiliation. It > is wanton cruelty. It is verbal lynching. As > the saying goes, the tongue > doesn't weigh all that much, but its wagging > can weigh heavy on someone's > heart. It doesn't create close relationships. > It does create a lonliness > and distrust. Do you realize that when you > speak negatively about someone > specifically or stereotypically, it causes you > to dislike them. The > minute or two in which we feel powerful and > important is so insignificant > and temporaty compared to the amount and > duration of damage we can cause. > Words we say today often may last a lifetime in > someone's heart. A simple > comment can travel deep, can penetrate like a > bullet, causing untold > damage in its path. That comment may not > penetrate someone with a > stronger inner steel, but it can richochet, > penetrate the thin skin of > another, and impact on attitudes and > relationships of those others. That > is not a legacy to put on a resume or > tombstone. > > With that said, know this. Forcing others to > speak what you think > is right isn't right either. You're not > defending the freedom of speech > by violating that right in the name of right. > Besides, it doesn't do much > good. Just because you don't hear it doesn't > mean it went away or > disappeared. It merely has been hidden away or > went underground. You > can't shut lips as a way of opening the mind > and heart. Silencing the > mouth is not mind or heart altering. Banishing > does not eliminate; it > merely disguises. Imposed silence cannot alter > lives; it just creates a > pressure cooker where things stew. Prohibiting > words does not get to and > root out emotions, beliefs, and attitudes. > > Of course, we should replace hurting words > with healing attitudes, > discouraging words with encouraging belief, > impovishing words with > enriching actions. If I don't not utter these > distasteful words, if I > don't not think these distasteful thoughts, if > I don't act > disrespectfully, it is not because I think and > do what someone says I must > think and do. It is because the inner me > sincerely says I must; not out > of fear, but out of a deep-rooted respect for > the dignity of each > individual. And when we hear such words on our > campus, we shouldn't shut > people down in a impassioned knee-jerk > reaction; we should fight with > compassion to open their hearts. We should > seize the moment of having a > teaching moment. If want such insensitive > people to be sensitive to the > feelings of others, so much we be sensitive to > their feelings. We should > do that not with force of threat by a speech > police force, but with a > convincing moral force; we should not accuse > with a close-mindedness, but > discuss open-mindedly; we should not hide, but > bring out into the open and > identify; we should not silence, but talk and > listen and exchange. We > need wisdom, common sense, understanding, > sensitivity, awareness. It is a > beautiful, uplifting habit to get into. > > > Make it a good day. > > > --Louis-- > > > Louis Schmier > www.therandomthoughts.com > Department of History > www.halcyon.com/arborhts/louis.html > Valdosta State University > Valdosta, GA 31698 > /~\ /\ /\ > 229-333-5947 /^\ / > \ / /~\ \ /~\__/\ > / \__/ > \/ / /\ /~\/ \ > /\/\-/ > /^\_____\____________/__/_______/^\ > -_~ / "If you want > to climb mountains, \ /^\ > _ _ / don't > practice on mole hills" - \____ > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to tips as: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
