10. At what point does freedom of personal expression on a performer's part interfere with the rights of others in the form of what they find distasteful?

Our opinion on the matter has it that the only way the rights of the artist can be infringed to prevent others from being offended by their material is that we certainly think there should be restrictions against government officials sitting people down in a chair, putting a gun to their head, and mandating that people watch/read/listen to certain forms of art.

You might be thinking "But that doesn't happen", to which we'd agree. Since it's a matter of personal choice as to what people watch on their own televisions, listen to on their radios, read in their printed publications, etc., and there is such a thing as a remote control for those that become offended by what they might see on any given channel, we cannot see any valid justification for governmental censorship of the music video industry.

Bottom line, there is no such thing as a governmental right to live your life free from coming into contact with things you might find upsetting or offending, as much as those on the other side of this fight would have you believe otherwise. Nobody ever said that freedom is the easiest way to do things because it inherently can create a lot of friction between people of widely varying belief systems, but it is our opinion that freedom is the best way to do things because it keeps the power of choice with the individual to make such decisions for themselves.

If you give government the power to eliminate certain forms of entertainment, you are giving them the power to force a certain set of beliefs on the population as a whole. In a purely hypothetical situation, if they are given that level of power, we ask what could prevent them from eliminating all wholesome, family oriented material from the airwaves and forcing conservative, religious people to adhere to the belief system of the wildest music fans? We simply do not understand how giving government this level of power from the point of view of any one belief system can be helpful to a society. Because once government is given the precedent it needs to seize this power over society, there is *nothing* to prevent them from using it in ways that many that currently advocate the idea would find reprehensible.

It is for that reason that we must always safeguard even the most distasteful of speech..........even for the lowest form of humanity among us.......televangelists that use their speech to scam millions of dollars from the bank accounts of gullible believers to further their oppressive political agenda, "in the name of the Lord".

Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Friend's E-mail:

Go Back to homepage

Sponsored internet services provided to Rock Out Censorship by ONLINE POLICY GROUP.

This site and its contents are copyrighted (c) 1997-2003, Rock Out Censorship. All rights reserved.