Do "Freedom of Speach" and "Political Correctness" contradict each other?

Question

According to the American Constitution, every man, (meaning male and female) has the right to speach. The only time, Constitutionaly, that one's speach should be halted is when it directly inflicts on the rights of others, (such as instructing in violence toward another, as only one example).

Political Correctness, however, applies greater restrictions to speach. It demands that any speach which simply offends another be stopped. The speach does not have to imply or incite violence, it only needs to emotionally offend others.

That being said, do not "Freedom of Speach" and "Political Correctness" contradict one another? If so, how can both be defended and promoted simultaneously, such as Liberals and Democrats do, (such as with MTV, VH1, and many Liberal programs)? How can one defend another's right to speach, and then tell them not to talk about whites, blacks, men, women, homosexuals, Christians, Muslims, etc...?

Ha! Yes, it is "speech" not "speach". SORRY. ;)

Answer 1

people are so afraid to say what they think for fear of being labeled a bigot, racist, or homophobes...it has turned into a joke..

Answer 2

Legally no-- socially yes (sort of).

You don't have to BE politically correct. Threre's no law that says you can't use all the racial slurs you want. Look at all the neo-nazi marches, farakan (sic?) with his anti-semite stuff, most comedians are definately not PC, etc.

Political correctness has run amok. Its one thing to be respectful, its quite another to distort language simply because somebody doesn't like a given term for one group or another. And, I'm not talking about obviously hateful terms. What' the real difference between African-American and Black? The former isn't exactly accurate anyway. How is saying a person is "Black" any worse than saying somebody is "White"

Answer 3

First off, political correctness is anal retentive in nature. And very lopsided. It is politically correct for blacks to make very nasty comments about whites, but if a white makes a similar statement, s/he will be hung by the thumbs.

Common courtesy demands that we don't insult other people. Disagreeing with a point of view should be permissible, but using ugly epithets should not be. Now this is especially true if you are an Italo-American young male living in Brooklyn or Queens. You must be polite to the young thugs who come in from other neighborhoods to rob and steal.

Answer 4

you've made some defective assumptions: a million) That Freedom of speech is an absolute idea and that in straight forward words speech that motives actual damage is banned. the problem with this fallacy is that there is distinct consumer-friendly regulation and constitutional regulation dealing with risky speech that by no skill places a persons' existence in jeopardy. for instance, you won't be able to libel or slander a individual or company (that is a collection of persons). So why might want to you be allowed to slander a race, a creed, a sex, or an orientation? How is that particular than falsely claiming something hostile to a unique man or woman? Your different huge fallacy assumes that political correctness has a binding censorship result on each little thing. It does no longer. i am going to assert hateful issues or actually have reviews that are opposite to mainstream public opinion. I purely won't be able to say them with out outcomes (which free speech does no longer look after in any case). I also won't be able to assume the media or the authorities to attend hand and knee on me because I actually have an opinion. extra usually than not, "political correctness" is drawn by straight forward demographics. If a media outlet or a political social gathering desires to courtroom the target audience (or votes) of a demographic team, then it shouldn't pass out of its thanks to offend them. for instance, if NBC wanted extra lady visitors, it likely would not be a good theory to have slightly of writing that stated that they come again into the kitchen. (For an severe party). further, at Christmas time distinct merchants will favor shoppers a contented vacation in hopes of with the intention that the ten% of the wide-spread public that would not celebrate Christmas (that is a politically desirable vacation extra usually than not with out Christianity lately in any case) to be coated contained in the present paying for. in spite of everything, a much broader target audience skill more desirable sales.

Answer 5

They are contradictory only if there are legal impediments applied to the use of non- PC speech. There are not. The impediments to date are only based on courtesy and social pressures. When and if PC speech becomes sanctioned by formal law will it truly conflict. Therefore, we are free to speak PC or non-PC speech but our social pressures come to bear from custom and not law. I think a better approach to free speech would be to permit a more robust level of polite speech in all circumstances - and teach people to discern for themselves the value (high or low) of the individual providing the speech. Let people say what they wish to say and let the listeners discern for themselves.

Answer 6

Political correctness is not meant to infringe on the freedom of speech amendment. It is meant to remove all prejudice vocabulary. For example, it is politically correct to say African American instead of black. I don't think this changes the actual freedom of speech. And it doesn't demand anything. It just polite to use politically correct language.

Answer 7

Political correctness applies to business and service, not everyday life. It is mainly for the purpose of not offending potential customers.

But it doesn't matter too much anyways as the Constitution by now have been pretty much eliminated and defiled.

Answer 8

No...Political Correctness is a responsibility to use Free Speech correctly...Certainly we have the "right" to use racial ephitats for example...but its not politically correct to do so...We can yell fire in a movie theater but again..its not politically correct to do so.

Free Speech is a right we have..Policial Correctness is the responsibility to use it responsibily...in other terms one is a right and one is a responsibility...they are not the same things

Answer 9

"Freedom of speech" is a basic human right. "Political correctness" is a way of adhering to social norms. Therefore, since they are not conceptually equal, they do not contradict one another.

Basically, you are free to say whatever socially disagreeable thing you wish, from a legal standpoint. However, society would prefer that you take some care whom you may offend with your statements.

Answer 10

Political correctness sucks the inside of anass.

Answer 11

Well said. I was written up at work on one occasion because I stated my opinion on the war in Iraq (I stated that all the "insurgents" should be shot as soon as they were caught)