In a 7–2 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States has struck down a California law outlawing the selling certain violent video games to minors. Parents have to take responsibility for the games their children play.
I don’t play and don’t like shoot–em–up style video games. But nevertheless, this decision is the correct one.
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Westboro Baptist Church has the right to protest at funerals. Even though they are vile, hateful, really petty people, this is the correct decision. Popular speech doesn’t need protection; unpopular speech does.
…because they do. They really, really, fucking do.
A United States federal court has ruled a Missouri law prohibiting protesting at funerals is unconstitutional (via). It was targeted against Fred Phelps and his ilk. As much as a vile, despicable human being Phelps is, this is the correct decision. If Westboro Baptist Church does not have freedom of expression, no one does.
At Pandagon, there is a post about why free speech is important, and I can’t over–recommend reading it. As Amanda makes clear, the best solution to speech you don’t like is more speech.
The sexophobes have struck again. Via Shakesville comes news that a school in Menifee, California has banned a dictionary. Why? Because it contains a definition of the word “oral sex”.
Anonymous parent who made this ridiculous complaint: it’s a fucking dictionary, not a how–to manual. You does not need to be a linguist to realize that the definition of an act is not the same thing as instructions about how to do an act. For example, telling someone what driving is (operating an automobile) is not the same thing as telling them how to drive (too long to put here).
On the other hand, perhaps the school should ban other “obscene” books. One such book would be the Bible, from whose Song of Solomon God is left out, while still finding room to have the whole book be a love poem that contains explicit eroticism. After all, if someone is absolutely unable to talk to their kid(s) about something sexual in a dictionary, they can’t possibly be able to do the same thing to their kid(s) when something sexual comes up in the Bible, right?
An Alberta Court of the Queen’s Bench has overturned a ruling of the Human Rights Commission that held that a letter to the editor by Stephen Boissoin was hate speech (via).
As much of a vile, homophobic bigot that Boissoin is, this is decision is correct. It is dangerous to censor political speech, and a society’s true commitment to freedom of speech is measured by protecting the speech of the worst sorts of people.
Of course, this won’t make me refrain from calling Boissoin the homophobic bigot that he is. And this won’t make me back down from exposing the hatefulness of people like him, nor from condemning them.
