Too Much Freedom?

Shannon Wheeler’s cartoon “Too Much Coffee Man” is a satirical look at, arguably, one of The United States of America’s most famous freedoms, however it is also one of the most debated. It depicts our First Amendment right to freedom of speech and the conflicts that arise from this freedom. She illustrates this with two men, neither of whom will back down because of their right to freedom of speech. The two men represent different communities, such as state and local governments, schools and universities, private organizations, students and parents, and the general public that are continuously fighting for their right to free speech. In the cartoon, the two men go back and forth telling each other to “Shut Up” with no end in sight. The cartoon makes it evident that while freedom of speech is a great freedom it needs to be regulated so that people do not abuse the freedom. Luckily, freedom of speech is regulated by The Supreme Court, which is in place to tell a community when it needs to “Shut Up”. While Wheeler’s cartoon is humorous it is a fairly accurate representation of how people view their freedom of speech. The purpose of this paper is to discuss freedom of speech with respect to different communities.

By definition freedom of speech is the freedom for one to say whatever one wants however one wants. In reality this is not the case, as seen in the multiple texts discussing the limits of freedom of speech. During these instances one community’s freedom is being limited while the freedom of another community is being protected. Looking at Patti Waldmeir’s column “Freedom of Speech and My Right to Silence at Bath Time” this situation becomes apparent. She explains the situation as “either way, it is a question of commercial free speech: advertisers have a right to broadcast their waves, but consumers have a right to refuse to listen” (591). Waldmeir is discussing the banning of commercial telemarketing calls and the formation of the do-not-call registry. The do-not-call registry will infringe upon the commercial speech of the telemarketers, but at the same time protect the rights of the consumer. The column is written to the consumer which is clear when one considers the title as well as the informative tone. Waldmeir uses ethos to appeal to her audience’s values. She knows that the consumer values his/her right to peace and quite so she uses examples of this right being violated to gain her audiences trust. Waldmeir agrees with the consumers she’s writing to, but she still understands the telemarketers rights as well, saying “we all share the same constitution; somehow, it must protect us all” (592).

Then there is Steffen N. Johnson’s article “A Case the Scouts Had to Win”. His article discusses the Supreme Court decision allowing the Boy Scouts to prohibit a gay scoutmaster. This decision as Johnson states it, “goes to the heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of free association” (596). He argues that while people should be able to work, go to school, and have access to other basic necessities, they do not have the right to serve as role models for young children. That right is considered a privilege according to the Supreme Court. Morally it seems right to not discriminate, but as the Supreme Court explained, “forcing a group to accept certain members may impair its ability to express those views, and only those views, that it intends to express” (596). What if private groups were required to admit individuals that didn’t share the same views? Johnson gives hypothetical examples of this, saying that “men could assert the right to lead Girl Scout troops” and “heterosexuals could assert the right to lead gay groups” (597). These examples show that right to associate with others who hold the same views is a liberty that is equally shared between homosexuals and Boy Scouts. It also shows that different communities, i.e. Boy Scouts and homosexuals, can share similar views on freedom of speech. Johnson is writing to parents with younger children and he addresses them with a semiformal, persuasive tone.

This tone is also used to address the audience of Barbara Ehrenreich’s article “Ice-T: The Issue Is Creative Freedom”. Her article discusses the limits