Friday, October 31, 2008

It's our constitutional right!


In a parallel world, where political correctness doesn’t affect virtually every aspect of society, Sarah Palin would hang from a noose while John McCain burns in hell. However, this parallel world exists far from West Hollywood, where Chad Michael Morrisette sparked national controversy by publicly displaying just this scene with mannequins displayed in front of his home. After much pressure to remove the effigy, Morrisette got rid of the so-called Halloween decorations. But in an election where lipstick pigs overshadow policy issues, what’s the big deal?


While the effigy infuriated many, it calls important attention to Americans’ constitutional right to free speech. Although many found the display extremely offensive and excessive, the Secret Service, Los Angeles County Sherriff’s Department and West Hollywood city Code Enforcement Division found that it violated no law. “‘The sheriff made this clear: This is a country that has freedom of speech, and we protect that right even when we think it's idiotic and stupid and in bad taste," said Steve Whitmore, spokesman for the Sheriff's Department.’” It can even be argued that the effigy is just another method of engaging voters in the election process. It brings up an important question: where do we draw the line between censorship and free speech?


One might consider, “what if this effigy was replaced with a mannequin of Barack Obama hanging from a noose?” This would have a completely different implication, linking the effigy with racist sentiments, reminding us of the not-so-distant lynching of blacks in the 1800’s and early 1900’s. However, this exact incident occurred just over a month ago, at a small Christian university in Newberg, Oregon. A life-size cardboard imitation of Obama was found hanging from a tree with fishing line attached to its neck. Although the act was repugnant and hateful, it was an act that was determined to fall under free speech, and no charges were filed against the students responsible.


When dealing with issues of censorship, it is a tight rope that must be carefully walked. Although the image of Palin hanging from a noose may not be every American’s preference in expressing their political views, Morrisette should be able to display this image on his own property, as long as he has no intention of violence (We can safely assume a gay couple from West Hollywood have no intentions of actually hanging Mrs. Palin from a noose). Once we start censoring what is “too extreme,” the definition becomes blurred and our 1st amendment rights can easily be infringed upon.


In a ‘melting pot’ country, Americans should be able to engage in wide range of political discussion, whether it be through town hall meetings, blogging, or even displaying their political views with a controversial effigy. The display actually is a great example of the enthusiasm felt by so many Americans across the country. In less than a week, history will be made: we will either have the first black president or the first woman vice-president. A record number of voters are expected to cast their ballot in just a few days. People everywhere are actually excited to vote- when is the last time Americans have felt this way? It is to be expected that in an election with such emotionally charged voters, extreme opinions will be voiced- and that’s ok.

In fact, an effigy that encourages political discourse should be encouraged, not prohibited. A gay couple in West Hollywood is simply engaging in political expression, showing their dislike of a candidate that goes against everything they believe in. Although many others would choose to express their views differently, there is no reason the couple should be castigated for taking a passionate stance on a very important election. Once we begin censoring these demonstrations of free speech, we move further and further away from the democracy we love. Free speech comes with a price- Americans will not always hear or see exactly what they want or necessarily agree with. But the consequence of limiting free speech is far greater, and we must accept differing views on important matters- regardless of the extremeness of these opinions.


After all, this is America.

No comments: