2024 American Legion National Oratorical Contest Finals Champion Aubrey Moore – Prepared Oration

Summary

This video script explores the concept of hate speech and its relationship with free speech in America. The speaker emphasizes the importance of protecting the right to express ideas, even if those ideas are controversial or offensive. The script discusses the emotional nature of modern American society and its push for tolerance, which may inadvertently lead to the censorship of certain speech. It highlights the constitutional foundation of free speech and its protection under the First Amendment, citing historical cases like Brandenburg v. Ohio. Ultimately, the script argues for safeguarding freedom of expression as a fundamental American right.

Takeaways

• 😀 America has become a highly emotional society, where feelings are prioritized over free speech, leading to increasing support for censoring speech that offends emotions.
• 😀 A significant number of Americans support banning hate speech, with over 40% in favor of government-imposed speech restrictions, despite 91% agreeing that free speech is important to democracy.
• 😀 Cancel culture has raised concerns about what types of speech should be allowed, especially in relation to topics like LGBTQ rights, abortion, and affirmative action.
• 😀 According to the Pew Research Center, over 60% of Americans mistakenly believe that hate speech can be banned without violating the right to free speech.
• 😀 The First Amendment protects all speech, including hate speech, based on the principle of self-ownership and the right to freely express oneself.
• 😀 The Supreme Court has ruled that hate speech is protected by the Constitution, as seen in the 1969 Brandenburg v. Ohio case, which set a precedent for what constitutes unlawful speech.
• 😀 The principle behind free speech is to allow people to express their ideas, regardless of how offensive, cruel, or hurtful those ideas might be to others.
• 😀 A ban on hate speech may eventually lead to broader censorship, limiting all forms of speech and restricting freedom of expression.
• 😀 Iconic cases like flag burning (e.g., the 1984 Gregory Lee Johnson case) reaffirm that even symbolic speech, which some find offensive, is protected under the First Amendment.
• 😀 Countries like the UK, where hate speech laws have been passed, have seen negative consequences, including arrests and charges for speech that causes offense, highlighting the dangers of such censorship.
• 😀 The speaker emphasizes that protecting the right to free speech is essential for maintaining all other freedoms, and supports the idea that even offensive speech must be allowed to flourish within constitutional boundaries.

Q & A

What is the main argument of the script?

The script argues for the importance of protecting free speech, including 'hate speech,' under the First Amendment, and warns against the dangers of censoring speech in the name of tolerance.

How does the script define 'hate speech'?

The script doesn't offer a specific definition of 'hate speech,' but it implies that it includes speech that may be offensive, inflammatory, or controversial, especially when it targets specific groups or ideologies.

Why does the script emphasize emotions in the debate on free speech?

The script emphasizes that society has become highly emotional, and as emotions are prioritized, speech that negatively impacts those emotions is increasingly seen as harmful and subject to censorship.

What role does cancel culture play in the discussion of free speech?

Cancel culture is used in the script to highlight how societal pressures are pushing for the suppression of speech deemed offensive, even if such speech is constitutionally protected.

What is the relationship between 'hate speech' and free speech according to the script?

The script argues that 'hate speech' is a form of speech that, although offensive or hateful, must still be protected under the First Amendment, as restricting such speech would undermine broader free speech protections.

How does the script address the public's perception of free speech?

The script cites surveys showing that while many Americans support free speech, a significant number also favor banning hate speech, revealing a disconnect between understanding the true implications of such censorship.

What historical precedent does the script reference regarding free speech protection?

The script references the 1969 *Brandenburg v. Ohio* Supreme Court case, where the Court ruled that inflammatory speech was protected under the First Amendment unless it incited imminent lawless action.

What is the philosophical basis for free speech outlined in the script?

The script references philosopher John Locke's concept of self-ownership, which holds that individuals have an inalienable right to their own body, labor, and words, forming the philosophical foundation for free speech.

What example does the script provide of protected symbolic speech?

The script mentions the 1989 *Texas v. Johnson* case, where the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag, though offensive to many, was a form of protected symbolic speech under the First Amendment.

What is the script's warning about the future of free speech?

The script warns that banning hate speech, though seemingly well-intentioned, could lead to a slippery slope where all forms of speech are increasingly censored, ultimately stifling open discourse and democratic freedoms.