When sheep are taken to the slaughter they have no idea what is going to happen to them. They silently obey and blindly believe that they are being led to something different or something better. Then they are killed. This illustration is not so much about sheep as it is indicative of what could happen to the American people. Many would be skeptical of this view and say it’s a bit of a stretch, but George Washington was once quoted in saying “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” We may not know we are being led to the slaughter when certain restrictions on free speech are proposed, but the founder of this nation disagrees. Even though some expression may be offensive, content-based …show more content…
Before one can adequately judge hate speech and what should or should not be censored we have to unearth what is or isn’t hateful speech. According to Geoffrey Stone, legal scholar at University of Chicago, “Displays containing abusive, invective, or questionable content no matter how vicious or severe, are permissible unless they are addressed to one of the specific disfavored topics the court and constitution will not protect.” (Stone 81). There is obviously a fine line between what is hate speech and what is not hate speech, but so long as it is not libel, slander, or fighting words the constitution does not have a special exception for it. There is certainly speech that we are exposed to on a daily basis that may be severe and vicious, but this does not necessarily mean that this sort of speech is not permissible under common law. This is further clarified by Ralph D Stern, constitutional scholar and independent researcher when he states “Although incitement to violence is not protected, speech that simply makes someone uncomfortable, or uneasy is very much protected by the United States constitution, and the courts as well.” (Stern 3). How one is to determine where the line between being offensive and trying to