A license plate was proposed commemorating Palmito Ranch, the last battle of the Civil War, May 13, 1865. But someone’s offended. Texas law disallows any plate which offends “any member of the public.” Yes, any. So, the new “right” of the 21st century seems to be the right to not be offended. (see George Will column)
In 2011, the Supreme Court held:“The Constitution does not permit the government to decide which types of otherwise protected speech are sufficiently offensive to require protection for the unwilling listener or viewer. Rather … the burden normally falls upon the viewer to avoid further bombardment of (his) sensibilities simply by averting (his) eyes.”
Not good enough, says NewThink. A growing number of people, organizations and government entities seem busy creating a new “right.” What’s so wrong with not being offended? How do you define it? When the government tries to preempt offense you open an Orwellian can of worms.
Do we have a right to go through without being offended? How do we do that in a pluralistic society? What if the cause that moves your heart offends me?
What happened to free speech?