One of the biggest debates surrounding the legal and ethical issues of freedom of speech regards Kansas preacher, Fred Phelps. Documentary filmmaker, Michael Moore is an outspoken proponent of free speech -- in the following clip, he approaches Phelps' group. However, some would argue that Moore's actions are sometimes over the line of ethical speech -- he sometimes takes speaker's comments out of context in order to prove his point.
What do you think? How far should our legal system go to protect our rights as speakers? Should the government intervene against Phelps? What about Moore? REMEMBER -- THIS IS A COMMUNICATION COUSE!! KEEP YOUR COMMENTS RELEVANT TO OUR COURSE MATERIALS IF YOU WANT TO RECEIVE FULL CREDIT!!!
Watch this video and tell us what you think by posting a comment on this blog post (click "Comments" under the title of the post). It's worth 5 points:
Monday, September 27, 2010
Ethics and Propaganda
Labels: Quizzes
Monday classes -- due October 4th before class
Tuseday/Thursday -- due October 5th before class
Wednesday class -- due October 6th before class
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
55 comments:
I think that the freedom of speech is a wonderful thing. I am thankful everyday that it is a right that I am entitled to; however, I think that there is a time and a place for this type of protest. This should have been done on the courthouse lawn not at a funeral. That is the families time to grieve and it should respected. Both men should be ashamed of themselves for intuding on such a private thing.
I believe that some people take advantage of the freemdom of speech. The funeral is a time for friends and family not matter who you are. No one would indervine in that time. I am thankful for the freedom of speech. I feel that what ever belief you have is you. No one should make fun of you or protest. We are all unique and different. Be who you are not who others want you to be.
I believe that freedom of speech is probably one of the most important freedoms that we are given. However, just because we have the freedom does not mean that we should abuse the freedom. Just because we have the freedom to yell FIRE does not mean that we should do so in a crowded theatre. This is along the same lines as what is going on with the funeral protest. Just because he has the right to dislike gay people and the right to voice his opinion about how he feels about that lifestyle that is not the place to exercise that right. There has been a lot of controversy over to what extent we have this freedom and I believe that we have the freedom to speak what we want as long as it does not cause harm to another person. The problem with the funeral protest is that it is causing harm by disrupting the ability for these families to heal. Its along the same lines as the protest at military funerals that were going on because the preacher disagreed with the war. This is a time for that family to be able to say goodbye to a loved one not a time to be harrassed about that persons lifestyle or be told that they are going to hell because they served in a war that someone else didn't agree with.
I think freedom of speech is very important until the speech has created violence or harm toward others. Watching this video really bothered me. I am not a supporter of gays. However, I do not think it is right to judge them, dislike them as a person, or tell them that God hates them and they will go to hell. God does not hate anyone. He wouldn't have died on the cross for our sins if he did. God says, "Do not hate the person, hate the sinner." What Fred Phelps is doing is wrong and protrays a psychotic version of a "believer." I believe that people should have freedom of speech, but when it comes down to slander, violence or fight words, the government should step in and take action.
Freedom of speech is our right as American citizens and both of the men used that right. It is unethical to take someone's words out of context and if you don't watch yourself you can get yourself in a ton of trouble. I think the government should take a closer look as to what happens when people use thier freedom of speech but at the same time as said in my class "Your rights end where another person's rights begin". So there is no fine line. Yes sometimes you offend people but someone's ethical idea of freedom of speech will vary from person to person. Now as for both men, I don't think that the government should intervene either of them becaue they have a right to do what they are doing, where they are doing it and how they are doing it. What they are doing is not illegal because they are not damaging anything, physically hurting anyone, or trying to start violence. It may not be ethically right for either men but they are doing nothing to get the government involved.
I do not think that it is right to take what people say out of context so that it supports what you want it to. If someone is changing the things that we say then the government should intervene and take action against that person. Although I do not think that the things that Phelps is saying in the video should be encouraged, he has every right to say them. Also, i think the way that Michael Moore makes his films are very unfair and unethical. He changes what people say to be what he wants them to be.
I think you should beable what you choose to be and poeple should not jugde you cuz your gay or whatever else you may choose to be in the long as lone as you are happy.
you a the freedom of speech like everybody else does
MMeier
Monday night class
The US has some very ambigious laws, freedom of speech being one of them. No one really knows where to draw the line when it comes to freedom of speech, but in my personal opinion, protesting at someone's funeral definitly crosses an ethical line. For one thing, a funeral is a time to remember that person for all the good they gave to the world, not a time for someone to use as an outlet to promote their cause.
Freedom of speech is imperative in our culture. People have gotten bolder and tend to be more forward with what their thoughts and opinions. The whole reason people debate free speech as an issue is the concept of your actions being your "act of speech".. Freedom of speech is needing a U-haul by the supreme court and will most likely be a large case within the century... The act of protesting as freedom of speech is practiced by civil right movements... and hippies against the war in the 1960s.. A protesting at a funeral is much smaller in scale and should be left up to the regional government as intended by our constitution.
...
Jordan James...
There was no "victory" here on either side. Watching this made me sick at heart. There are people who truly don't have a clue...God sent His Son for all of us - not just a select few. We make the choice as to how we are going to live our lives...and like it or not - each one of us will be held accountable for that choice. It's just that simple.
Jeb Hann said:
I believe that most people either haven’t formed an opinion about the issue of homosexuality or they keep those opinions to themselves. I lived in San Francisco for over a year and enjoyed friendships with many people there. Some were overtly homosexual, some were obviously heterosexual, but for the most part it was viewed as a personal choice- like what car to buy or what team to root for. I didn’t try to convert anyone, and if I was asked for one reason or another about my preferences, I’d voice them. When people respect those boundaries, then it becomes a moot point.
If people like Mr. Moore and Mr. Phelps could agree to disagree, and follow the golden rule, this type of rude behavior would be reserved for football games.
First off I want to say I loved the video and everything that Michael Moore did. I do believe that we all should have freedom of speech and that there is a certain time in which our government should intervene. Granted I do not believe or like what pastor Phelps does but he does have a right as an american citizen to voice his opinion on any subject matter he chooses. I do not think it is right for him to start naming individuals that he seems to think are going to hell or what ever. I think that there is a time when the government should intervene and that is when he is picketing funerals or pointing fingers and naming names of individuals. I don't believe that he is a true pastor/christain or at least one that has read the bible and knows and understands what it says. There is only one person that knows our fate after death and no one here on earth should point a finger at someone and tell them they are going to hell for something. Our government should definately intervene when he and his group pickets the funerals of others and he should have to pay for the heartache and defimation of character he is inflicting on others.
I believe our legal system should be involved only if it applies under our current laws. If we disagree, then it is our responsibility to work to change those laws. I believe both Mr. Phelps and Mr. Moore's actions could have provoked anger and rioting. That would be legal grounds for government involvement. It was definitely a volatile situation.
I believe that while we should protect free speech, because it is an important part of our political culture and a basic right there are cases like this one where it could have lead to a violent outcome. Both Moore and Phelps were being very provocative and the situation could have ended very badly. While I believe the government should not intervene in that area i believe that there should be some rules on what people can and cannot do. And finally While i feel that both men were acting wrongly ethically, they were not doing anything legally wrong.
Freedom of speech, I feel is the most important right we have. If you take away from one, you are taking away from all. Everyone has that right regardless how I feel on the subject. Both sides of this particular clip with Moore and Phelps, went over board in my opinion. There are ways to act and say things. You don’t have to be outrageous to get your point across. You can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. I also feel the government should step in when it pertains to funerals or there is violence involved.
Legally speaking I feel that neither of the men is wrong. Freedom of speech is a great thing that I feel should be protected at all costs, however it can be abused. Morally and ethically speaking however I feel that Fred Phelps is way out of line. I think that in no way is Michael Moore wrong, he is simply expressing his freedom of speech and doing what had to be done. The government can only do so much to stop someone like Phelps when he is legally within his rights. It is just very unfortunate that someone would choose to express their right like this.
The freedom of speech aspect legally protects Phelps and more importantly protests on both parties don't result in physical confrontations. Phelps was quick to judge and preaching propaganda that God hates gays and lesbians. There was issue with moral value when Moore's entourage make-out in public in a city that is struggling to embrace homosexuality.
I could not watch this video, it made me sick to my stomach. Dont people know that it is a sin and they will go to hell for this. Wow if this is freedom of speach then yes I believe this has gone to far, I dont want to hear or see this filth ever and I sure dont want my children to be exposed to this type of content.
Well, I both think they abused their rights of the freedom of speech. They both had a right to this but, when is enough! Things like freedom of speech even though we have the right gets out of hand. Especially with the situation in this clip about gays and lesbians. I don't agree with the being gay or lesbianism but, i don't agree with the way that Mr.Phelps handled it and used his freedom of speech.
Even though I enjoy Michael Moore, he is only fanning the flames of the fires he is trying to put out. People who are insecure and feel left out(of society) have always flocked around narsassistic individuals with self promoting ideas. The best thing to do is to ignore these people. Eventually these groups will fade away.You can not start adjusting peoples rights ever time a group or person offends a part of society. Once you begin where do you end? Who gets to make the decisions? Probably not you or I.
I think freedom of speech is all right, because you can said what ever you, want and people want even care. but after watching video i didn't feel comfortable because it taking about gays right, and saying that god hates gays, but god doesn't hate gays, in the bible its say god love ever one the way they are.
by matt alford
This is a prime example of how people abuse their right to freedom of speech. Both Phelps and Moore surely got their opinions across but in a way that their ethics come into question. The lines between legal and ethical cross here and thats when it begins to be hard to tell whether or not the government should intervene.Personal attacks should not be allowed. But with Phelps picketing at funerals and Moore protesting at the state capital in Kansas they both are equally at fault for abusing their rights to freedom of speech. While my opninion sides with Moore, the government still should get involved in those situations when the groups are attacking people personally.
I feel we should all be thankful for having the right of Freedom of Speech. Theres many countries, places in the world were this privlige isnt granted. After watching this video i felt all the hatered gays go through. I think that as long as they dont bother anyone people should mind their business. Theres a proper time and place to protest and make your point clear in a matter were you wont hurt anyone
Legally neither of the men did anything wrong but I do believe that the government should intervene with what Richard Phelps is doing at funerals. Although he is not making threats against the people or harming them in any way he is emotionally harming them and invading the families privacy. Phelps picked the wrong time and place to voice his opinion. Everyone should be able to grieve privately. In this video I see Phelps more in the wrong as far as abusing his freedoms but Michael Moore has for sure crossed some lines in his other films by taking what people have said out of context.
I am a big believer in free speech. I never want to be in a situation where I don't feel like I am able to voice my opinion. I am thankful for free speech in the United States. And with that said, my opinion of Phelps is that he is extremely inappropriate for choosing funerals as his time to express his opinion. I think both Moore and Phelps are within their rights expressing their opinions. I don't think the government should be able to do anything about him being at funerals, but I do wish he would have the decency to choose a different time in which to have his protests. It is funny to me that Moore used Phelps' ways against him by merely speaking freely about his views in the same capacity as Phelps does. My overall opinion on government interfering with our free speech is that I would never want that, because I value that freedom of mine and would never want to not be able to voice my personal opinions.
Olivia Sheppard
(Wed. Evening)
I agree with Debi we dont have the right to judge. I feel Phelps could have picked a different time for this. Funerals are not that time. Its hard enough on the families. As far as freedom of speech, Do we really have any? Example: If you get pulled over, can you really tell the cop what you think? Laws change every day and we can not keep up with all of them. I also think if they could take it away from us they would. only a matter of time.
My feelings on this are very strong. I being a lesbian myself do not agree with anything that Fred Phelps does or says, but I do agree that he has a freedom of speech. But I also think that he should pick a better time and place to do his "speeches." I do not think that Michael Moore was in the wrong he was just trying to get Mr. Phelps to see a different point of view. I have been in the line of fire of some of Mr. Phelps's pickets before and even though they don't cross the invisible line that is put out, they are harsh with there words, which can cause some rebellion.
Fred Phelps has the right to express his opinions, but I think he's going about it the wrong way. Everyone is entitled to free speech, but there's a point where it becomes too much. Protesting against homosexuality at someone's funeral, around the deceased's friends and family, is in-ethical. They had a right to gather and mourn the death of their loved one, and Fred took that right away from them with his protests. I understand that he thinks he is doing the right thing, but it has become uncomfortable and offensive to others. The same thing can be flipped around to Michael Moore. He exercised his free speech by using it against Fred Phelps, but it was taking Fred's rights away. Speaking for what we think is right isn't always the answer. Many could find Michael Moore's opinions and actions as offensive as others supporting the opposite side.
I'm sorry but I do not feel that my comments on either side of this debate are necessitated on a public forum. However I feel from a free speech side that both sides are wrong. To take the view of where your rights end is where someone else's rights begin then the film maker specifically targeted his opponent in such blatant ways that the preacher was coerced into leaving what he stood for. So in that part, and for creative editing, he violated the others rights. As for the preacher, I feel that he has no right picketing the funerals of anyone. That is about as disrespectful as you get. I also feel that he is violating my rights by having his group fly the American flag upside down. If he thinks this is so bad of a country then there is the border. Don't come back....
So in summation. There both wrong. but thats my opinion, at least on free speech...
Ed Macken Crowder Mon Evening
I believe that everyone deserves to have free speech but I do believe that they should also have respect for others. I believe that Phelps is being unethical by picketing at funerals. I see his displays as free speech, but I believe the delivery of the speech caused it to become unethical! I think the government should only get involved with free speech when it directly endangers another person. I think Phelp's speech is unethical and should not be delivered in the method in which he is doing.
Free speech is something that makes our country what it is. It is a right that we should all have, but use that right with some sort of ethics. I believe that what Phelps is doing is extremly unethical. He has the right to say what ever he wants to his congergation of followers in sermons, or private, but picketing funerals is not right. You should have respect for familes that are grieving and not use it as a place to speak a opinion about someone that you as a human do not have the right to say what their fate is, whether it be heaven or hell. I do think that the goverment should intervene in some cases because some speeches can insight violence, I think it was a couple of weeks ago that authorties did have to be called at one of Phelps pickets because a man drove by trying to mace picketers.
I think what Phelps is doing is awful, but not illegal. It is part of our right to freedom of speech. I think that the law should intervene at funerals. That is a personal event and should be able to be kept private. I think that they are taking some of their protests to the point of harassment, which is not okay legally. I think Michael Moore is doing good to try to show people what's happening. His actions are far more ethical than Fred Phelps.
I think that the freedom of speech is an essential part of being an American. And even if you don't agree with what he says, he has the right to do so. It's not freedom of speech if you put any limit on what he can say, because then that would enable them to limit what you could say as well. I have a friend who had frequent visits from Phelps at his church, but by talking they can't force people to believe what they are saying because no one, at the church, seemed to care that he was there. Phelps has the right to voice his opinion, anywhere he chooses to, and just like the people at the church you have the choice not to listen.
I think the 1st amendment come into play here. I feel like both Phelps and Moore are protected under this, because it would be classified under friendly protest since there is no physical harm being done. The 1st amendment states we have the right to "excerise religion." Now what Phelps is doing I feel is a very loose interpretation of this, but so is Moore's interpretation of freedom of speech.
The legal system has the obligation to protect each one of these speakers, in their friendly protests. Should the government intervene? I think the real question at hand should be can the government intervene? I think the answer to that is no, not at this point. If things were to get violent then they would have the obligation to step in.
I feel both Phelps and Moore should both step back and take a look at this from a moral standpoint. I feel as if Moore went about protesting homosexual rights the wrong way, and I feel Phelps is going about protesting religion the wrong way. I think any passer by would leave with a bad taste in their mouth for either one of these protests.
Now in leaving my comment I want to clarify I believe in the people's right to choice. It is everyones right to make their decision on religion and/ or sexual orientation.
I think freedom of speech is an amazing thing. But it can also be used in the wrong ways & the wrong place of time. The person usen freedom of speech should make sure they have all the info & make sure there usen there speech in the right moment of time.
I believe that freedom of speech can be used right and wrong. I believe that both Phelps and Moore used their 1st amendment rights wrongly. Now i do agree that that what they were doing is still constitutionally correct and the law can not intervene with their actions. Phelps was basically slandering all homosexuals, and Moore was mocking and "showing up" Phelps and his followers. Everyone has the the right to choose their religion and sexual orientation, but people should not go to the extremes they went to to convey and express their two opposite points and messages.
I'm personally a strong believer in gay rights. I was shocked to see on the video it is illegal to be gay. I support equal speech rights regardless of color, creed, origin or sexual orientation. I think both men were in the wrong. A funeral is not a place to advertise ones beliefs. Michael Moore used a stereotypical view of what it is to be gay, and Fred Phelps projected an overly righteous image of hate-filled christianity. If they truly feel it a must to protest, they should be considerate of the time and place.
Hmm the Michael Moore thing had an interesting way of protesting the protesters, in effect being as headstrong and assertive as the GHF guys. It's also positive that (from what I saw) it was all humorous in nature and there wasn't any name calling from the "evil ones". It shows even the enlightened cast a big shadow I guess.
Bennet E.
I believe that legality wise Fred Phelps is within his constitutional rights to say what he feels. It may be un-ethical for him to do such acts during a funeral of a gay soldier. It does not mean that I condone his actions. Using the types of speech that these people are, are un-ethical to me as well. Using a stereotypical image of a homosexual is just as wrong as showing a heterosexual male who is ignorant, and takes his female counterpart for granted. They are extremes in both cases
I think that this is a very broad topic when you think of constitutional rights and then peoples beliefs. Like everyone has the right to say that they don't agree with gay's and gay marriage but i think its a lot of peoples beliefs to not like gays i know that i don't believe in that because thats what i believe. but also i think its God's and only God's right to pass judgement on people not mine!
I think freedom of speech is a great thing but there should be limits on what people can say. Fred shouldn't be able to stand out side and just call gays faggots and say they will burn in hell. It's okay for them to be against gays but they shouldn't be out there disrespecting them.
I think that freedom of speech is a amazing thing but I do not like the way the people in this clip were utilizing their freedom. I think the legal system should step in when citizens are using the freedom of speech in a hostile way, such as the way both men in this clip were doing. I think that they should be held accountable for their public actions. There is a difference between speech and trying to get your point across by having men "make out" with each other in public or make people think that there is sexual things going on inside a bus in the middle of town. I do not feel that either of these should be considered "freedom of speech".
I am a firm believer in freedom of speech but people like Fred Phelps and his followers take advantage of this right to hate other people. I think are legal system effectively protects our first amendment rights. After watching this clip i wanted to learn more about Fred Phelps and him protesting at Veterans funerals. I discovered that in May 2006 President George W. Bush signed in to law the Respect for America's Fallen Heros Act. This Act prohibits anyone from protesting within 300 within any cemetery. I believe the government did the right thing by making this law because protesting a funeral is extremely offensive and rude. I don't think the government should intervene against michael moore because he has not done anything that is extremely offensive and disrespectful and he is entitled to his first amendment right as well.
There's a fine line between who's right and who's wrong in this situation. After watching the video, I was shocked at both parties' behaviors. Phelps is the most close-minded person I've ever heard from and Moore is doing the exact same thing as Pastor Phelps, and that is expressing their beliefs. When it comes to law and the protection of free speech, it becomes difficult to say what you can and can't do. In my opinion, I think Phelps is wrong according to ethics and Michael Moore is simply spreading awareness that the sexual orientation of a human being is not what defines them as a person.
I think that both parties are wrong in this situation. Pastor Phelps is extremely judgemental, but he is not saying anything that goes against freedom of speech. Michael Moore is skewing some facts and that could be perceived as wrong, but it really doesn't go against freedom of speech. I believe that people should only get in trouble when they provoke violence during their speech, but otherwise the government should protect our rights.
I think that everyone has the right to speak their own opinions and beliefs. I have always valued freedom of speech because it gives everyone the chance to be heard as an individual. But, I also believe there are limits to freedom of speech. No one should have the right to spread lies or slander that damages a person's reputation. Therefore, I believe the government has the right to intervene in a situation where that would arise. It s the government's job to protect the people of the United States. As for Pastor Phelps, he really doesn't say anything out of line. He speaks his opinion and his opinion only. There is no laws against that. As for Micheal Moore, he has a tendency to spread to spread lies and not tell the whole story.
I think that our right to free speech should not be hindered. This right is one of the most important rights granted to us. But in this situation I think that both parties were wrong. Phelps has a right to voice his beliefs but there is no need to use derogatory terms. Moore's group has the right to speak out against Phelps' group but there is no need to go looking for confrontation. So both groups were exercising their right to free speech but they were also taking this right too far.
Freedom of speech is a primary point that the US was founded on so of course i believe in it strongly. However it is not to be abused or taken lightly. There is a time and place for everyone to voice their opinion, and at a funeral, for one to protest, that is just inconsiderate and completely disrespectful. Protesting is better suited for a rally or courthouse, not a funeral where people are grieveing one they lost.
I think the freedom of speech is great, But i dont agree with how some people abuse it. There are times where it is fine to state your opinion and times where you need to keep your mouth shut, like at the funeral Phelps had no right being there and protesting why the family was greveing there loss. Although it is a right i do believe that the government, at certain times should intervene and keep people from causing scenes when its not needed.
I strongly believe that everyone has a right to freely give a speech and let people know their ideas. However, the freedom of speech is come into effect on right time and right situations. What Phelps did was clearly wrong. I felt extremely bad for that student beaten until death only because he was a homosexual. He had done nothing "legally" wrong. It was too crucial for me. A funeral is a place where people mourn for the dead person and cherish his or her memory. There might be others that agree with Phelps, but the situation and place where he was insisting his ideas was absolutely wrong. He was definitely causing harm to the dead student and his family's reputation. Even though every person has freedom of speech, but Phelps crossed the limits and this is illegal. For certain types of illegal speeches, the government should intervene to make it stop. Therefore, I think the government should interfere against Phelps and stop his protest.
I think that the freedom of speech is an extremely important aspect of any society and it is one that America values greatly. Each of the perspectives expressed in this video should be able to state their opinions in public, though there is a point where the method of informing may be breaking a dangerous boundary. When regarding extremely heated, emotional topics each of the opposing perspectives should be equally represented in court, or a similar controlled environment that cannot lead to an outbreak of anger or even violence. I think that matters such as an individuals rights should be discussed legally, in a court with an established fair jury, or as fair as possible. It disappoint me to see that people intentionally hurt one another, such as the anti-gay picketers that attend the funerals of deceased homosexuals or military men. Every family and friend of the deceased should be given their time to grieve, perhaps by making such events private such issues can be avoided, the picketers should not be allowed to emotionally harm those who are already grieving because it is their right to take part in those funeral processions. The border between where one persons rights begin and another one ends is thin, it is hard to define where one group begins taking away the rights of others.
Both Michael Moore and Fred Phelps are wrong in what they do ethically, Michael Moore for doctoring the footage of what his interviewees say and Fred Phelps for hate speech. Neither of them should be supported and neither of them are right in what they do. However that being said they do still have, thanks to the United States Bill of Rights, freedom of speech and can therefore do these things that they both do and not be punished for it. Doest that make it right? No. Does that mean it should be imitated? Definitely not. Both of these men are in the wrong, and we can all learn how not to conduct ourselves in ethical speaking and in life by the way that these men do conduct themselves.
When it comes to freedom of speech, I think that it is a great thing. However, I do think that it can be taken too far. Once a speaker takes his speech far enough as to infringe on the rights of others it becomes a problem. When Fred Phelps causes a disruption and emotional distress at funerals, that is beyond wrong. I wish that the government would intervene however I think it would only cause problems. I also think that Mr. Moore was also very close to being considered illegal, because of the possible provoking of violence. In conclusion the freedom of speech is a right that I'm thankful for but it should not be taken advantage of.
I believe that our legal system should protect our freedom of speech to the extent of protection until speech becomes offensive. I do not believe that highly offensive speach really should be protected so strongly. I feel that both Moore and Phelps are ethically incorrect and offensive to different groups, and should not be protected. Although they are both entitled to their opinion, they go about it in a way that should not be protected by the government.
Freedom of speech is part of being an American. It is the people's right as citizens to express their thoughts. There was not any harmful actions being taken. Although, I do believe there is a time and place for protesting, and a funeral is not one of them. Americans should also respect those who have lost a loved one.
Post a Comment