Censorship is an interesting topic and can make the bravest of souls cringe at the possibilities when those who have the power to censor allow their axes to fall. Subjects that lead themselves to censorship at times are some of the most innocuous things to some, but can be so offensive to others as to incite riotous behavior. So, does censorship have its place and how do we as a civilized, open society best decide where to censor and where to allow one to speak or write the poetry or prose that is apt to offend?
I have been exposed throughout my life to overbearing people who eagerly tell others what is best for them, how to behave, and what they should be doing. This exposure has probably caused me to fall on the side of little or no censorship of others, within limits of the law. I do however, believe that subjects and things are age dependent and what is / can be uncensored to adults has to be handled differently for children. I also believe to a point that the determining censor who should rule supreme is the parent of the child, again within the limits of the law.
I have heard it said that yes, we do have freedom of speech, but we don’t have the right to make someone listen to us. Often, people decry censorship when their ideas and speech just are not popular, are not conveyed in the right setting, or when they speak as an authority because they have a bully pulpit from which to speak. Discriminatory listening is not censorship, it is merely a choice of a group to disagree with and react to what is being said. When someone is in a small minority, let’s say a single Yankee fan in Fenway Park, they most likely will be conveying ideas and speech that are not popular to the Red Sox fans there. If someone goes to a church meeting, it will not be popular for them to want to speak from the pulpit on the benefits of atheism. If someone is an actor or performer who has a cause or subject they want to support speaks from their entertainment venue, it may be rejected by their fans and their ticket sales may suffer. This again is not censorship, it is public choice to choose not to purchase tickets / music / movies of the entertainer because people usually go to these events to be entertained, not “enlightened.”
The fear of mine is who really has the power to censor? Is the person just as bigoted or out in left/right field as the one who is censored, but they are on opposite ends of the spectrum? Are those with the power to censor just opposed to thought that does not support their agenda? Is there an underlying current to censorship that tends to allow certain things to be said, but squelches things once allowed to be spoken of freely in the name of progress? All these questions and more can be asked of the powers who censor because they are just people too.
Once, we as a country seemed to be able to tolerate open speech and had a universal sense of humor and acceptance when it came to observations and speech of the human condition. We now have seemed to have turned into the United States of the Offended if/when we hear something that we feel is spoken wrongly. We at one time had the old adage, “sticks and stones……”, but not anymore. We have come to a point where we as a society seem more concerned with someone’s statements and attitudes more than we are than their actions. I happened to catch a re-run of All In The Family with my children a year or so ago. They couldn't believe that this show was allowed to be on TV because of all the ways they spoke freely and openly of things that would be squelched on TV today. Just watch a movie on TV and see how much profanity is allowed and how many words are now bleeped due to political correctness. Have we come that far that we can’t have a sense of humor about ourselves and our human condition and we can’t speak without fear of offending someone? I hope not. Until then, speak out, be sensitive, utilize the correct venues, but don’t be held back by fearing censorship.