BDSM & Alternative Lifestyle Personals
 | Blogs > Doc_Sonar > Drawing from the Well > We Have The Right To Express Our Opinions (or, ‘Over-Fed Hedonism Necroses,’ OK?) :) |
We Have The Right To Express Our Opinions (or, ‘Over-Fed Hedonism Necroses,’ OK?) :)
2/17/2012 11:08 am |
Yes. We have the right to express our opinions.  A Friend reminded Me of that recently, and, without confirming if how it sounded (to ME) was what she meant - it SEEMED as if she felt I was suggesting that she had no such right of expression. If true, that was simply inaccurate. I’ll ask her soon. We have the right to express our opinions. Back to opinions. Some say that – like Feelings - they can't be right or wrong. I don't know. +++ So. To what ends do expressing ones opinions go - especially when either the speaker knows or discovers later that their free expression is hurtful? We have the right to express our opinions. Do we ever need to weigh the entitlement with the implementation of it? And what if anything does a person need to consider? We have the right to express our opinions. +++ But first, different subject -- this Pragmatically Affirmative PSA for that wrestles with recurring, destructive, invasive, thoughts or memories~ · That the memories from your past that used to make you angry, depressed, annoyed or sad can be changed? · That those memories could now trigger good feelings? · That our inner mind will find the old emotions, find the positive lesson in that memory and create a connection with that memory that holds the new emotions? · That thinking in this way is a form of self-hypnosis? · That 95% of people can hypnotize themselves, and that people with higher IQs are usually more hypnotizable? It ain’t never necessary that you believe Me immediately, but, when you use it/do this, this is a tremendously beneficial experience, and a very uncomplicated way to let your mind be free of the pain and judgment of the past. Let’s just say that Simplicity – which I strongly, strongly advocate -- is wonderful ~ when we let it be so. +++ You deserve the good weekend that’s coming, yeah? Work it right!  Breathe Deeply~ Peace img: orig. art More (tons more) about that ‘opinion thing’ Inside..... Doc_Sonar I advocate Simplicity, Patience & Compassion...and...More than Ever - "I believe in looking reality straight in the eye and denying it." ~G Keillor |
||||
 2/17/2012 11:12 am |
Opinions, the First Amendment, and Choices Like other topics that seem to encourage self-protectiveness and lose-lose situations, using other right to have and express our opinions can often be a hot button topic. On the one hand we have the right to opinion, like say for example here on alt. We have the right to post cock/cunt shots) but on the other hand, some don't give a shit about/don't want to see dick/pussy shots, even if allowable – like some don't wanna hear your opinion. And of course, some link opinion with fact, or act to their opinion even when provided with specifics that disprove the opinion - which is always ‘thought & reality-stopping’. You, like Me, totally recognize that Opinions are often as different from fact/reality/truth as chalk is from cheese. I sometimes I think it’s too bad I don't have the right not to hear even the beginning of some of them – you know – even that little bit that let’s Me know I don't want to hear them for whatever reason. Some may feel this way right now. Still – we have a guaranteed right to free expression. I go back and forth about it – what’s possible about preserving the freedom of opinion & expression while encouraging self to temper the hurtful/cruel, insensitive, hateful kinds of free expression whenever possible. +++ A little History Out First Amendment is pretty spectacular and its scope has no peer in world governments. We have the right to express our opinions. Based on the first few dozen words of the Bill of Rights, the First Amendment of or constitution applies to the government-- to protect individuals from government censorship.... the text of the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech,” it means that no federal, state or local government official can infringe on your free-speech rights...the government may not punish a particular viewpoint . A private company is not a government or state and therefore generally is not subject to the requirements of the First Amendment. (Some of us likely already know that the hard way.) Thankfully, public school students retain some level of free-expression rights, even during the school day. We have the right to express our opinions. Although - speech that substantially disrupts school activities, for example, is not protected by the First Amendment. It also applies to the Internet, but not to the broadcast medium. So-called "fighting words ... which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace," are not protected. (Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942) At the same time, freedom of speech does not prevent punishing conduct that intimidates, harasses, or threatens another person, even if words are used. Threatening phone calls are not protected either. Still, we have the right to express our opinions. 1969, in Brandenberg v. Ohio , the Supreme Court struck down the conviction of a Ku Klux Klan member, and established a new standard: Speech can be suppressed only if it is intended, and likely to produce , "imminent lawless action." Otherwise, even speech that advocates violence is protected. The Brandenberg standard prevails today. Whereas the Constitution outlaws slander, libel, perjury, inciting riot ('Fire'/'Bomb,' when untrue, included), freedom of speech in a business (w/o possibility of termination), and promoting anarchy, the Constitution indeed protects all other freedoms of speech, which includes opinion.....well – except unprotected obscenity, material that is “harmful to minors,” and the other instances above. We have the right to express our opinions. +++ Truisms The First Amendment enables citizens to express their thoughts and beliefs in a free society. It allows citizens to practice whatever religion they wish — or no religion at all. Without the First Amendment, religious minorities could be persecuted, the government could establish a national religion, protesters could be silenced, the press could not criticize government and citizens could not mobilize for or against social change. (~14qll-qbout dot) As my youngest daughter said. “it’d be really good for lawmakers and any court to stay out of my vagina and my uterus..... (Damn; that’s My Girl ) We as US citizens have the right to freedom of speech, of expression...as in, Congress [and the courts] shall enact no laws prohibiting the freedom of speech.) We're able to be who we are and have the right to express through (legal) behavior and opinions. We have the right of hurtful, disrespectful, or offensive speech. We have the right to brutal speech. We have the right of prejudiced, bigoted or racist speech. We have the right of hateful speech. We have the right to hurt others with our speech - with our freedom of expression. Having confirmed that, I also advocate compassion, mutual respect, dignity, and understanding. These four ideals might very easily conflict with freedom of expression. I can legally express opinions that are offensive to others or that describe others in ways that rob them of their dignity. The Constitution protects these acts. Again, our individual rights must be balance with a deep recognition that we live together in a community. We might control our behavior; even curtail our freedom of speech a bit to ensure that we recognize the inherent dignity in all human beings. That is not to say that the principles of community are intended to restrict our freedom of expression. As a matter of record, the principles affirm “the right of each person to express thoughts and opinions freely.” However, the principles set the expectation that we behave in a way that creates a climate that is welcoming to all. That a message is distasteful, hurtful and outrageous doesn’t make it illegal – or legally actionable. One test for whether a person believes in the 1st Amendment: Whether they still support the right of someone to speak when they say the most vile, evil, awful, hurtful things. What can we learn from this?’ Can we say we don't want this type of language/behavior in our community? That, each of us has that right, just, as a community, do we have the right to protect the dignity, integrity, and respect of each other that we want in our community? What do you think about acknowledging freedom of expression while also showing regard for the feelings of the listener or reader? The U.S. Constitution, the 1st Amendment clearly states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." U.S. citizens have been given the freedom to worship and express their opinions in the way they choose. These are rights we all cherish. +++ Let me take it to some outlandish but factual extremes: A person certainly has the right to assemble and march boldly down a mostly holocaust survivors’ neighborhood carrying Nazi flags. A person has the right to wear white hoods and sheets, even fly a confederate battle flag, singing Dixie through Harlem, and carry placards of insult and chant words of hate. A person has the right to say "I guarantee there’ll be no [fill in an appropriate group or ethnicity, here] in MY club/neighborhood/town/heaven." A person has the right to say, "I 'think' your uppity bitch mother is as ugly as she is stupid." A person has the right to say, "Fags and carpet munchers are all unholy, immoral, and I think they absolutely disgusting and bound for Hell." A person has the right to say, "any woman was asking for it - look how she was dressed/where she was/who she was with?" A person has the right to antagonize extremist quasi-religious zealots - like jihadists - by burning their holy book. A person has the right to say, "yeah, hell yeah I’m judgmental and will exercise my right to express my judgments anywhere and anytime to anyone I damn well please, PC be-damned!" A person has the right to tell their adult children they are the hugest imaginable disappointment, and they’re sorry they were ever born. A person has the right to have and to express shitty opinions of another’s religion, politics, upbringing, sexuality, life choices, moral choices, parental fitness - their looks, their competence, their intelligence, their ethnicity.... This list of free speech rights we Americans have could continue on forever - ranging from everything to the sensible and kind to the cruel and wildly crazed. We have the right to express our opinions. We have the right. Just - to what end? +++ What would happen if a person chose to exercise compassion and respect ~ along with the freedom of expression with our human community? No one has to protect non-controversial speech...just – the kinds I referred to above. We don't have the right to be valued. Still ~ imagine if people chose to, anyway...We have the right. Just - to what end? What happens when we express however we choose - with little or no regard to the listener’s feelings? We're able to be who we are and have the right to express through (legal) behavior and opinions. What if I said that few of us want to obstruct a person/group’s freedom of speech -- rather, just to remind that there IS a choice – which we could easily choose to be aware and considerate and compassionate when we DO exercise free expression? Bed Ink. We have the right to express our opinions. And how much more could we benefit our species by self-modulating those (hurtful) free expressions that we choose to share or say out loud? Let’s just say that we have the right to express our opinions -- . and –can we also say that we have the opportunity and the privilege ~ of being kind? Like a tie at the end of regulation play – nothing settled  Your (opinions) thoughts? +++ Breathe Deeply~ Happy Black History Month! Peace “.....They may say I'm a dreamer – but I'm not the only one....” ~ JL/imagine (sources: Lawdotcornelldotedu; Legal-Dictionary; Kansaspress dot Ku dot Edu; Caselaw dot Findlaw dot Com; Firstamendmentcenter dot Org; Constitutional-Law dot Net ACLUTX Doc_Sonar I advocate Simplicity, Patience & Compassion...and...More than Ever - "I believe in looking reality straight in the eye and denying it." ~G Keillor
| ||||
2/17/2012 4:28 pm |
Did you know...self-hypnosis section is mind-opening information, thank you. As for freedom of speech and freedom of out-there images, I'm there, but I still have standards.
| ||||
 2/17/2012 6:22 pm |
The right to express an opinion is not the requirement to express an opinion. Sometimes the only thing exercising freedom of speech accomplishes is to cause pain or exacerbate conflict. It's possible to be correct/legal and still wrong. just my 2 cents...      Speak and act from love, or else shut up and sit on your hands.
| ||||
2/18/2012 4:10 am |
"The First Amendment enables citizens to express their thoughts and beliefs in a free society. It allows citizens to practice whatever religion they wish — or no religion at all. Without the First Amendment, religious minorities could be persecuted, the government could establish a national religion, protesters could be silenced, the press could not criticize government and citizens could not mobilize for or against social change. (~14qll-qbout dot" DOC I DO NOT KNOW MY US HISTORY BUT I SHOULD IMAGINE THAT THIS LITTLE PIECE OF WISDOM CAME FROM A BUNCH OF SMART THOUGHTFUL PEOPLE LOOKING AT THE OLD WORLD WITH ITS RELIGIOUS WARS AND KNOWING THAT THEY DID NO WANT THAT. THEY ACTUALLY TORTURED AND KILLED PEOPLE FOR BELIEVING SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAT THE STATE RELIGION. "As my youngest daughter said. “it’d be really good for lawmakers and any court to stay out of my vagina and my uterus....." I AM WITH HER ON THAT ONE. WE USED TO HAVE THAT FREEDOM IN CANADA BUT OUR PRESENT GOVERNMENT WHILE PROMISING NOT TO REOPEN THAT DEBATE WHEN IT WAS RUNNING FOR ELECTION IS BEGINNING TO TALK ABOUT IT AGAIN TO APPEASE ITS BASE. DOC I AM PRETTY MUCH OF THE OPINION THAT YOU LET THE HATEFUL CRAZY PEOPLE TALK BECAUSE THROUGH THEIR SPEECH THEY IDENTIFY THEMSELVES AS HATEFUL AND CRAZY. IF AMERICANS VOTE REPUBLICAN AFTER THESE REPUBLICAN DEBATES THEY PRETTY MUCH DESERVE WHAT THEY GET. "A person has the right to say, "yeah, hell yeah I’m judgmental and will exercise my right to express my judgments anywhere and anytime to anyone I damn well please, PC be-damned!" ACTUALLY DOC I AM PRETTY MUCH THAT WAY AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS OFTEN DOES NOT SERVE US WELL BECAUSE IT KEEPS US FROM KNOWING THE BIGOTS FOR WHO THEY ARE AND IT LEAVES THEM FEELING THAT WE ARE DISAGREEING WITH THEM OUT OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS INSTEAD OF BECAUSE THEY ARE IDIOTS. I AM NOT ABOVE SOFTENING MY SPEECH SOMETIMES IF I THINK THERE IS ANY HOPE OF CHANGING THE AUDIENCES MIND. WHEN I SPEAK DEFENDING THE RIGHT TO OWN A FIRE ARM I ALWAYS WITHOUT EXCEPTION TRY TO APPEAR CALM AND REASONABLE BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING MORE FRIGHTENING THAN A CRAZY PERSON WITH A GUN WELL EXCEPT A CRAZY PERSON WITH THE ONLY GUN. YES YOU MADE YOUR POINT AND I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES I AM NOT AS CAREFUL WITH MY SPEECH AS I SHOULD BE.  HAVE YOUR SAY, I HAVE HAD MINE
| ||||
2/18/2012 8:02 am |
As my youngest daughter said. “it’d be really good for lawmakers and any court to stay out of my vagina and my uterus..... (Damn; that’s My Girl ) Damn Straight- Tell Your Girl I Am Right There With HER!!!!
| ||||
2/19/2012 2:17 pm |
Expressing opinions...such an apt topic after some time spent in hell (visiting my mother for her birthday yesterday). In recent years, she has nothing BUT opinions. There is no such thing as conversation. It is all about passing judgment and spewing her views no matter what the situation or who the recipients may be. Unkind, negative, overbearing, hurtful. I would love to speak to her without hearing ANY of her perspectives on any given topic. I seriously have no more patience. And I don't get where it came from. She used to take other peoples' feelings into consideration, and had a modicum of self-censorship and self-control. She thinks that she is right about everything; there are never two sides to anything. I can't handle it any more. So...sorry about the rant but...expressing opinions is super if it lends to a conversation or a two-sided interaction of some kind. If feelings aren't crushed. If there can be validation on both sides. But expressing opinions in the face of all that is human and humane is SO unnecessarily self-centered. Honoured to be collared by my beloved Master S
| ||||
2/20/2012 8:36 am |
'I have the right to express my opinion' is up there with 'but I was just being honest'. Neither is justification for causing hurt. Funny how rarely we hear people say 'I have the right to keep my big at mouth shut unless i'm saying something nice'.  Shame that.yus xoxoxoxo I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not" Kurt Cobain
| ||||
2/22/2012 2:42 pm |
A person has the right to say "I guarantee there’ll be no [fill in an appropriate group or ethnicity, here] in MY club/neighborhood/town/heaven." Doc, I'd like to suggest that you remove this one from your list, for I think it's moving from the category of free speech to the category of a promise of illegal discriminatory actions. Unless, of course, the speaker is lying. Other than that, I'll say that yes, all of the others are permissible, though some of them would be very ill-judged and even self-defeating. Why self-defeating? Because it seems to me that generally people want to influence others in order to get agreement and to have the listener(s) see the words or actions as beneficial, both to themselves and possibly to society as a whole. But words that stir up hatred or that hurt others will frequently turn out not to be beneficial at all to the speaker, for others don't agree (will disagree with the tone, even if not with the basic idea expressed) and may even think less--considerably less--of the speaker. I believe that most messages, even negative ones, can be conveyed in a manner that is courteous and shows at least some respect for the other person or people involved. If I may take a very minor example from my own relationship with my mother when she moved near me after my father had died: She came over to visit me frequently and each time criticized my housekeeping (which, I'll admit, was not up to her standards, which have always been high); after about the third time, I waited till she was about to leave, gave her a hug, and said gently, "Mama, I wish you wouldn't comment on my housekeeping when you come; it hurts me to hear that from you." I learned later that she had phoned my sister after going home, and asked if she thought I had really been hurt by her criticism; and my sister said Yes. But what I experienced was that she never again made that criticism...and we almost never had another hurtful experience in the remaining eight years of her life. I'll grant that this was an optimal situation, for we loved each other and neither wanted to hurt the other. But still, I'm sure that some ways of asking her to stop the criticism would have injured our relationship rather than making it better. A person who hates "is incapable of making a joke, only of bitter ridicule. . . Only those who can laugh at themselves can laugh authentically." (Vaclav Havel)
| ||||
2/23/2012 9:19 am |
~smiles soft~ and bows low Doc, I LOVE this blog so much. You affect my life more than You may ever know. I ADORE you and we have never met but I feel like I could walk up to You and hugs you and not feel strange about it at all ~Niix~ soft of eye and light of touch, speak ye little and listen much.....
| ||||
2/25/2012 1:51 pm |
"When we do confirm what words/action do, if they continue, don't we then know there's intent rather than mistakes behind it? (As if They're saying, 'I KNOW this hurts/offends, but I'm gonna say/do it anyway.') It's what I conclude." I think I agree, but I wish I didn't have to. I know that people do say things that they know are offensive, but...and perhaps this shows a lack of imagination on my part...I find it difficult to understand why people would deliberately want to offend or hurt others, especially on a continuing basis. Yes, I can see it in a fit of anger, for I've occasionally done that myself; but then I've been ashamed of myself afterwards, even if, as with one person, I thought that she had asked for it by her own actions and thus had deserved it. But, as I indicated, I was then ashamed of myself for having lowered myself to the level where I could do such a thing. I think that what I'm meaning to say is that I don't see how someone could live with himself or herself if that was a regular and frequent way of behaving. Yes, if the offense is repeatedly performed, and the recipient has indicated that it hurts, then there almost certainly must be a deliberate intent to hurt. And I know that such things seem to happen, but I find them very hard to understand. (I suppose that I deal with them by seeing them as a part of the question of how evil can exist...a question that has stumped many over the centuries. But just tucking such things into an established category doesn't really add to my ability to understand them.)  A person who hates "is incapable of making a joke, only of bitter ridicule. . . Only those who can laugh at themselves can laugh authentically." (Vaclav Havel)
| ||||
2/27/2012 6:12 pm |
Why people intentionally hurt. . Hm. Guy Findley believes that' people pounce on others as they do -- when they do -- not because they want to cause pain, but because they're afraid of being hurt [and] there are many sleeping parts of ourselves that secretly feel good while they get us to do wrong'. Could be. And ans excerpt from 'the Hurting of One's Being (on world psychology dot info) says {There are people on this planet that actually take pleasure in hurting other people. I think Scott Peck in his Road Less Traveled said this best when he said, “There really are people, and institutions made up of people, who respond with hatred in the presence of goodness and would destroy the good insofar as it is in their power to do so.” “They hate the light and instinctively will do anything to avoid it, including attempting to extinguish it. They will destroy the light in their own children and in all other beings subject to their power. Evil people hate the light because it reveals themselves to themselves. They hate goodness because it reveals their badness; they hate love because it reveals their laziness. They will destroy the light, the goodness, the love in order to avoid the pain of such self-awareness.” Peck sees that truly evil people take an active rather than a passive path of avoidance of legitimate suffering. He says they will take “any action in their power to protect their own laziness and to preserve the integrity of their sick self. Rather than nurturing others, they will actually destroy others in this cause. If necessary they will even kill to escape the pain of their own spiritual growth.” It is easy to hurt most beings because the heart is vulnerable. And our bodies are just as vulnerable. It is even easy to hurt very strong beings but the difference is that they feel the hurt; they suffer, and get over it more quickly. But even the strongest being still has the capacity to feel and thus feel hurt, pain and suffering...} Could also be. Some even feel that's sadism. "Sadism is inherent in the human psyche: man fears death or ruin on himself, personifies it as a force, and believes they can bargain more life by hurting others. The projection of Thanatos, or the death drive, is classic psychology" says help dot. I've not so much research on the why, but quite a bit on the How (to neutralize the feeling and the people that like doling it out.) Appreciate the Mental Seeds Teach... xoxo Doc_Sonar I advocate Simplicity, Patience & Compassion...and...More than Ever - "I believe in looking reality straight in the eye and denying it." ~G Keillor
|
 |
 |
 |
| Become a member to comment on this blog | ||
 |
