Viewpoint - Viewpoint

What exactly is stilting of a conversation? What exactly prevents freedom of speech? Is it comments from individuals who express opposing views and beliefs? Or is it where individuals criticize others because they have an opposing view?  Or is it where others harass others because of opposing views? Or, is it where individuals Chastise and label others because of those opposing views? 

I guess that we should first define what is freedom of speech? To use the comments of the much Loved, or much Hated (until you need them) ACLU…

How much we value the right of free speech is put to its severest test when the speaker is someone we disagree with most. Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life warrants the same constitutional protection as other speech because the right of free speech is indivisible: When one of us is denied this right, all of us are denied.

Free speech rights are indivisible. Restricting the speech of one group or individual jeopardizes everyone’s rights because the same laws or regulations used to silence bigots can be used to silence you. Conversely, laws that defend free speech for bigots can be used to defend the rights of civil rights workers, anti-war protesters, lesbian and gay activists and others fighting for justice.

They quoted a professor with the following “I have always felt as a minority person that we have to protect the rights of all because if we infringe on the rights of any persons, we’ll be next.”

They continue to state “Defending First Amendment rights for the enemies of civil liberties and civil rights” means defending it for you and me.

And…

Freedom of speech allows for the Free Exchange of ideas which allows for Growth through debate, through education, through knowledge. If we don’t allow for freedom of exchange then individuals become scared, nervous, apprehensive, and unfortunately “biases are driven underground where they can’t be addressed.

Now that appears to be fair and square right? I guess this means that because I disagree with you, I am entitled and justified to stand my ground, isn’t that not correct? Yes, of course you do.. but, still, even when we are practicing our privileges we must still also remember to exercise responsibility.

So, when does Free speech stop being fair and square? I think the Supreme Court has a proficient answer to this question…

Online Speech and commerce should always be open and vibrant without concerns of threats to freedom of expression — the internet should foster democracy Democracy and freedom of expression move in tandem, one fueling the other. Neither survives alone.

Freedom of Speech stops being productive and even be considered illegal, when it - target individuals. When there is enticement or advocacy of hatred which ultimately entices and incites discrimination, hostility, harassment, intimidation or violence, and individuals are unable to participate or exercise their rights to participate due to fear!

Sometimes the stilting of speech may be veiled, subtly – under the guise of humor; sometimes it under the guise of name calling, or labeling.

The most Subtle Disguise is when it sometimes camouflaged with the Claim that Free Speech is being stilted by utilizing titles such as “Naysayers”, Critics, Finger Waggers, “conspiracy theorists” or “Fear Mongers” – these individuals will then continue to cleverly espouse that anyone who is not in perfect agreement with their views or opinions; or displays any reasoning or rationale outside of their beliefs are therefore guilty of stilting freedom of expression and speech.

It is the Name Calling and Finger Wagging, the labeling, which in turn does create censorship. It does stilts speech. I know this personally from the hundreds of emails from individuals who have expressed and unwillingness and apprehension of posting online, for fear of the retribution that may come their way for expressing a contraire opinion.

Free Speech does indeed come with responsibility…

We must commit ourselves to arguing for what we believe in and meeting even the most abhorrent views in open debate, not just in the editorial column, not even just on the governmental level, but in our everyday lives. In short, I believe that free speech has no real value without a simultaneous commitment to think about and debate the issues at hand in whatever capacity we can. Our brand of democracy demands far more responsibility than most people realize. Without the majority at least making an attempt to think about what it is doing, we will never improve society. This is the true goal of free speech: the hope that the people as a whole can figure out our problems and ultimately reach a just society. And if this aim is kept in mind, perhaps the debates over free speech will not seem quite so intractable.

(http://dispatch.fandm.edu/read.php?id=62)

AND…

There are no legal limits to free speech, but there are civic limits. In any society, there is a civic understanding that free speech should be used wisely so not as to provoke sensitivities, particularly in hybrid, multicultural societies we see in the world today. It is a matter of civic responsibility and wisdom, not a question of legality or rights…. there needs to be an understanding that sensitive issues must be addressed with wisdom and prudence, not provocation. Just because you have the legal right to do something doesn’t mean you have to do it. We.. (sic) all have to understand the people around “us all”. “Do we say things that can provoke or create harm to others” (sic) just because we’re free to do it? No. It’s called civic responsibility

Quoted - Tariq Ramadan

-

----------------------------------------------------

ABOUT KAREN MATTONEN, CAC, CSP

Karen Mattonen started a career in Human Resources when she served as a Recruiter for Snelling Corporation. Leveraging her tenure with Snelling, Karen founded Advanced Career Solutions in 1997 focusing on the  HVAC and Mechanical Construction industry. Her reputation for excellence is echoed in the satisfaction of clients and candidates she has serviced nationwide. Furthermore, Karen is esteemed for sharing her expertise in Recruitment Education, Ethics and promoting self-regulation for the Recruiting industry.

She has a new and future-oriented vision of what recruiting can and should become: a profession we can be proud of for its ethical standing, professional conduct and ability to build great organizations. Her doing-well-by-doing-right philosophy is shaking up the status quo in an industry that needs to be shaken. She does this with conviction, leadership, and a distinctive voice that cries out for change.

Outside of the HR community, Karen Mattonen has been cited by Microsoft as a resource in how to use Microsoft Outlook as an ATS. She has also served as the Marketing and Public Relations Director for the 3^rd largest city in Utah.

Her passionate and tireless advocacy has led her to create HireCentrix - The Pulse of H.R, Regulation, Retention, Recruiting and Risk Management www.hirecentrix.com.  Hirecentrix is a company dedicated to providing training to the HR, recruiting and staffing industries, which includes a special focus on the ethical and legal dimensions through offering a full service resource for individuals to share and communicate, obtain current and accurate information, acquire and provide education and learning within the quickly expanding, diverse and rapidly changing Recruiting and Human Resource climate.

Karen has achieved accreditation as a California Accredited Consultant (CAC) through California Staffing Professionals. She has also gained her Certified Staffing Professional Certificate (CSP) through American Staffing Professionals. (www.americanstaffing.net)

Click here to reach Karen via email.

##

Comments: