thomascwaters.com

The basis of the opinion linked below is the decision by a TV channel not to air an anti-gay propaganda program sponsored by the American Family Association (AFA). The AFA claimed that the TV special would “reveal the truth about the radical homosexual agenda and its impact on the family, the nation, and religious freedom.” Lozon believes that this was a denial of the 1st amendment. He writes:

Free speech is free speech, no matter how offensive and uncomfortable it may be.

His interest seems genuinely rooted in free speech, for he does not seem to have positive things to say about the AFA, or other similar groups. He calls them hysterical. He believes that homosexuals (his language):

should ignore the righteous rants of the religious right and instead focus on the legal battles that need to be waged on the federal and state levels to guarantee their full civil rights under the Constitution, which mandates that laws be applied equally to everyone.

From my perspective, this is an important argument to consider. He would hold that all sides of a debate deserve to be heard, a position that I agree with. He writes:

Until sexual orientation is no longer an issue and all marriages are recognized as equal under the law, everyone in the debate has a right to be heard — even the sanctimonious souls on the religious right.

However. here is the underlying issue, as long as lies are projected and the GLBT community is wrongly portrayed, we are not likely to see the full acceptance he speaks about. So how does a culture balance free speech and a requirement for fair or truthful rhetoric?

Free speech is Free Speech

I disagree with Lozon that anything is free speech, and I think the writers of the Constitution may agree, and there is plenty of legal background about what is or isn’t free speech. But starting with the medium, it is hard to see paid TV as being free speech. If an individual wants to stand on a street corner and spout off whatever they want- fine by me! If you want to express your opinion  in other forums where opinions are expressed, fine by me. But presenting something as factual and truthful when it is neither, especially when it is harmful to others, crosses the line. A choice not to air lies and misrepresentations is not censorship.

Did WOOD-TV cave in?

Lozon asserts this, but I question if it is true. I was unable to find any statement by the station to that effect. My guess would be that the station reviewed the program and determined that there was either a chance that the claims made in the program were unsupported and inflamatory, or outright untrue. Speech can be a weapon and using it to cause damage, is a very different purpose than to use it to give voice to one’s opinion and ideas.

Antiquated Biblical Arguments

Lozon writes, “I fully support the right of these groups to publicize their antiquated Biblical arguments…” and so do I! But messages like the program which was not aired on WOOD-TV hasd little to do with a Biblical message (that may or may not be antiquated depending upon your religious beliefs). It is a very different message to say “The Bible says this…” and to say things such as “Homosexuals want to destroy your family.”

Hate Speech

I think rightfully, Lozon is leery of the notion of hatespeech. On the one hand, if we as a contry promote free speech, what is hate speech? On the otherhand, it is easy to see how destructive speech can be. This question, what is hate speech, and what are simply lies and misinformation is one that we as a culture must address. Would Lozon be so quick to speak up in support for a White Supremicist program as free speech? Or if someone made a program attacking the Pope?

Lozon concludes

Someday, we will look back on this dispute over the civil rights of gays as one of those embarrassing moments in our nation’s history, similar to how we reflect on the struggles for equality by black people and women.

I truly hope this is the case, however if we are ever to get there, we must recognize how messages are used, and hold media distribution channels, like television accountable for airing truthful, accurate, and useful information. While we must place utilize the legislative process to advance equal rights, we, as individuals participate in te democratic process by giving voice to our own individual truths and protesting events that perpetuate lies and msinformation is nothing more than free speech.

COLUMN – Gays and lesbians seek to have equal rights – Holland, MI – The Holland Sentinel.