Our First Amendment freedoms are under attack, and have been for some time now. However, in the last two or three years, those attacks have become more prevalent, because they have a problem with speech that differs from their designated point of view.

Let’s take a gander at the op-ed that appeared in the LA Times yesterday. It has a cute title: “The case for restricting hate speech.”

The high points (or is it low) of the op-ed are as follows:

• We regulate slander and libel. So how come we can’t regulate hate speech?
• We can let the KKK do their stuff, deal with college frat boys hurling insults, not yell FIRE in a theatre, but racist hate speech isn’t regulated?
• The “regime of free speech protects the powerful and popular.”
• The Supreme Court protects soldiers funerals from the Westboro crazies but not the LGBTQ community.
• Shoppers and businesses are protected from aggressive panhandling, I can’t quite figure out how that’s hate speech, but I digress.

So after all of that, her conclusion is this:

Racist hate speech has been linked to cigarette smoking, high blood pressure, anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and requires complex coping strategies. Exposure to racial slurs also diminishes academic performance. Women subjected to sexualized speech may develop a phenomenon of “self-objectification,” which is associated with eating disorders.

Who wrote this dreck??

First three words are “As a sociologist.” https://t.co/q7Cvf7CKnl

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) June 21, 2017

Well that explains a great deal doesn’t it? Ultimately the author, Laura Nielson, is attempting to make the case that hate speech and thus FREE SPEECH must be regulated better because right now it’s triggering everyone and causing PTSD.  

Let’s take a look at exactly WHO is practicing hate speech, demanding any speech they dislike be shut down, and causing tension, riots, and injuring others. LANGUAGE WARNING

TrigglyPuff

Berkeley Riots Shutting Down Milo’s Speech and vandalizing the campus

https://youtu.be/RhUR0hZXCP8

A Trump supporter attacked by Berkeley professor Eric Clanton who was wielding a U-lock

Shut down a Yale Professor because …Halloween or something

Professor says No to demands of Evergreen students ordering all whites to vacate campus, and craziness ensues. *Btw – due to the threats of violence from those opposing Professor Weinstein’s stance, his family is now in hiding.

University of Missouri

Then there are the latest examples of professors posting online threats that close college campuses, or BLM activist professors who shrilly and angrily defend excluding people from events based upon their race. It’s even led to these kinds of reactions from students and young adults.

https://twitter.com/Jmama320/status/877650700771008512?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fsamj-3930%2F2017%2F06%2F22%2Fzomg-not-that-college-student-so-triggered-over-conservative-reading-material-she-alerts-msnbc%2F

https://twitter.com/Jmama320/status/877651780015763456?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fsamj-3930%2F2017%2F06%2F22%2Fzomg-not-that-college-student-so-triggered-over-conservative-reading-material-she-alerts-msnbc%2F

That poor little snowflake. Whatever shall she do? How DARE they assign her something to read that is so triggering!

Do you see a common thread here? The supposedly marginalized folks that Ms. Nielson is defending are the ones adding fuel to the flames of hate speech, destroying property, injuring people, and shutting down ANY speech that they determine hurts their oh so superior worldview. In fact for some, the ability to offer a differing point of view means the speaker is a shill for the Alt-right.

Nielson’s opinion ignores some key realities. Such as:

And this:

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what Ms. Nielson is oh so subtly advocating. She wants the U.S. to go the way of our far superior European counterparts and start regulating hate speech. Ok…

These are the Facebook comments that got a dude jailed for two years in the UK. /1 https://t.co/BuDIYwCMK3

— VeryFinePopehat (@Popehat) June 21, 2017

Is what the guy said hateful? Yes. Should he have been thrown in jail because of it? No.

Congratulations, you made an obscure Facebook idiot into a free speech martyrhttps://t.co/AUEqCdZOQI

— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) June 21, 2017

And don’t forget this regarding the current situation in the UK.

In the UK right now: 500 active investigations involving 3,000 jihadists & another 20,000 who are former subjects of interest. But ⬇️ https://t.co/ymZbhO837h

— Nick Short (@PoliticalShort) June 21, 2017

And then there’s this:

German police raid the homes of 36 people accused of making hateful postings on social media sites https://t.co/3IZpON2jQF pic.twitter.com/dNPiQa0Hsv

— New York Times World (@nytimesworld) June 20, 2017

Do we REALLY want to go down that road? Are we Americans really that sensitive that we can’t handle opinions that are counter intuitive to our own? Maybe we are. Maybe we need a primer on how to be offended.

Here’s the thing. Our Freedom of Speech is a gift and a responsibility.

Ms. Nielson ignores that in favor of advocating restrictions on speech that she determines is hateful so supposedly marginalized people won’t need therapy. She wants to be the arbitrator of which speech will be offensive and which will physically harm others. What she REALLY wants? Censorship by her rules.

And THAT is offensive.