Earlier this month, I read some good news that got me to thinking, and today I’m here to crystallize a couple of things that people are only saying on the far side of the room, as it were. In short: this is happening, but you might not have heard about it yet.

From blocking CRT without people really knowing what it means, to the “Don’t Say Gay” bills that have been proposed by the hundreds now, people are finally saying, “ENOUGH”.

While everyone in this country deserves the right to safely speak up on every position they have thoughts on, some people seem to be making it their life’s work to remove the free speech that we all hold so dear, but of course, only from certain people. The “rules for thee but not for me” crowd either has no sense of their hypocrisy, or they DO understand what it means, and they embrace it gleefully.

We’ll address the latter first. So here’s how this goes: if you want to restrict speech by law — by mandate — so that certain subjects cannot be discussed in public, then you are censoring. However, if you also support commercial propaganda, you are literally demanding to have it both ways.

Now, I know that many people have no problem with hypocrisy when it’s their own, but you cannot defend such a stance when anyone bothers to look at it and call it out. If you want to censor anything at all, you must stop with your paid propaganda, which means that must also be outlawed. No more blatantly lying and calling it “news”. Easy choice, right?

Well, if you say that your propaganda and lies are covered under the First Amendment, then so must be every discussion of race, racial inequity, gender, gender identity, and everything else that you would like to eradicate because it makes you personally uncomfortable.

So which will it be? Do you want to claim free-speech and have your fake news sources be classified as “entertainment” so you don’t get sued, fined, and shut down, leaving your opponents to speak up as well? Or do you want to admit that good laws are fair to everyone and let Congress do their jobs and block out your misinformation for the real public good?

To be clear, we are not talking about your “morality” under any guise. We are talking about the letter of the law. Isn’t that how you justified outlawing these other things? Making laws that you claim protect the children, protect the family, protect morality? Because using (unconstitutional) legislative power to say what people cannot say to you is hypocrisy of the highest form. And that cannot stand the light of scrutiny.

Yes, unconstitutional. Remember Amendment 1? “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech….” There’s more to it, but that’s the part that counts when you literally outlaw descriptive words or specific parts of our nation’s history from being taught.

And while some states have enacted laws that abuse our most precious freedoms, they shouldn’t, and when they do so, they violate a clear part of the Constitution that most people claim to love as the foundation of all of our laws. The ACLU said it succinctly: such hostile laws “suppress free speech and deny people the right to an accurate, complete, and inclusive learning environment,” and we can all agree they’re intended to do just that, First Amendment be damned.

So let’s talk about this some more. But let’s all be adults about it this time, and hold everyone to the same standard. After all, if a good law applies to each of us equally, so must our standards. Double-standards are not fair to anyone, and cannot be codified into law by thinking adults. And no one can be allowed to make laws who is not a thinking adult.

Allowing anything else is willful self-destruction.

Leave a Reply