A Lesson to Be Learned

In a world where there seems to be advancements in just about everything from technology to medicine, we seem to still fall short of social tolerance and acceptance. How are we able to advance technologically or even medically but not socially? I honestly do not know the answer to that question but it is fairly simple to justify the latter. Social advancement relies on too many individuals to pull their weight. As a matter of fact, it relies on everyone to pull their weight. To get everyone going in one direction would be quite an accomplishment.

Now this is not a call for the advancement of any one social issue. It is not my place and nor is this the platform that I would use to express such beliefs. I am calling for an understanding of how, in this day and age, the Constitution and our rights of citizens work. 

Unless you have been living in a hole the past few days, maybe you have not heard about Donald Sterling, the most recent owner of the Los Angeles Clippers. It was reported last Saturday that Sterling was recorded on tape, without his knowledge, speaking harshly to a female friend about her affiliation with several prominent African-American people. The comments made were without a doubt racist in nature. The NBA as of yesterday officially banned Sterling from the league, fined him $2.5 million, and is now forcing him to sell the team. 

Very few people on radio and TV have expressed any objection to these consequences. However, I was quite surprised by the number people who have commented online or even called into various shows objecting to the punishment that he was about to receive. All of them were using the same argument. 

"It is his constitutional right under the first amendment to make those statements. He shouldn't be punished." The freedom of speech. This argument is one that I get often if a student says something that is inappropriate in class. 

What we need to realize is the context in which the Constitution and our Bill of Rights was written. The reason why many documents from our Bill of Rights to as far back as the Magna Carta was written was to protect the people from the government. Our Declaration of Independence from Great Britain made that perfectly clear. The list of grievances were long and most of the rights that were abused are now protected in the Bill of Rights. Again... these rights are protected so that government does not overstep their power.

If we understand why our rights are protected and from whom, then we should understand that we, as citizens, are without a doubt protected in the Court of Law. However we need to understand that these same rights are not protected in the Court of Public Opinion. The freedom of speech is protected so that no individual can be prosecuted by the government (national, state, or local). The freedom of speech is NOT protected from the opinions of others.

Sterling's comments will not be used against him in any way, shape, or form in a judicial setting, but we have witnessed the repercussions of those comments when it comes to a public forum. Witnessing consequences for comments made should not be unfamiliar to us. Right or wrong. What we say does have strings attached. Attached are other people's opinions (for and against) and possibly repercussions. It does not matter who we are, but obviously the bigger the name the heavier those repercussions can be. Just ask radio personality Don Imus, the home cooking Paula Dean, Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson, and now former Clipper's owner Donald Sterling.

Right or wrong. Agree or Disagree. 

We must understand and realize this truth:

What you say can and will be used against you in the Court of Law Public Opinion. #RiseTalk