The Right To "Offend" and "Be Offended"

As a part of a notable presentation I once had the opportunity to attend, one of the principal speakers openly-acknowledged still having—as he with tongue-in-cheek put it—a “few” unresolved personal imperfections. Such as:

(1.) “Having a down deep preference of not ever being made aware of disagreements with his views, opinions, and perspectives—regardless of any image of open-minded tolerance he may portray”; 

(2.) “Having a strong craving to have ‘his’ way in most matters—in spite of any uniquely-obliging image he may convey.”

In this self-deprecating manner, the speaker was of course drawing attention to some aspects of human nature not at all unique to him. Attention to some shared attitudes and behaviors that most if not all of us, at one time or another, fail to duly consider—as a result of our ignorance, oversight, or intent. Especially, for example, when using Internet-facilitated social media to share our hopes and concerns and/or to comment about that shared by others.

Yes, in spite of social media’s illusive safe-space buffer and ever-growing political-correctness algorithms, etc., even this “modern day communications experience” is not immune to providing us with, in not always necessarily gentle and subtle ways, some human nature reality checks. None the least, regarding the limitations and consequences of even our most admirably intended communications. For example: 

(1.) Presenting an argument or opinion to people who already agree with it is actually, as they say, “Preaching to the Choir”; 

(2.) For some among us to accept facts, logic, common-sense, and historically-founded experience and wisdom, etc., seems to be a futile or otherwise impossible activity best described by the adage, “Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig”; 

(3.) Before undertaking the impossible task of having truly meaningful communications with those combatively opposed to entertaining any view other than that of their own, all would be well-advised to heed the caution flagged by another old saying, “Never wrestle with a pig; you both get dirty and the pig likes it”; 

(4.) Sharing firmly-held hopes, beliefs, and concerns with others, via social media or otherwise, inescapably entails certain risks and a mix of potential double-edged sword outcomes. None the least being—"relationships that as a result are either sustained, improved, strained, or irreparably-damaged, etc."

Therefore, at times some might reasonably consider it best for all concerned to just keep one’s self our hopes and concerns and views about that of others. Especially regarding deeply engrained and often emotionally-charged attitudes regarding politics, religion, etc.

Yes, that might seem so—until, that is, one considers the heavy (often ultimate) past and present price paid by so many to protect and preserve the “liberty to speak freely” (while not infringing upon the equal rights of others). Our right to offend and be offended; our right to agree and be disagreed with; our right to at times have our way and at times accommodate that of others. 

A take-away from all this chatter seems to be—and as evidenced by Amendment #1 of our U.S. Bill of Rights (first ten Amendments to U.S. Constitution)—America’s founders clearly understood, through wisdom and personal experience with tyranny, that it is to our peril should we ever fail to grasp that “freedom of speech” is high among the indisputably-essential foundation blocks of our inalienable (God-given) rights to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. 

The “right to offend” cannot exist where the “right to be offended” does not. 

                                                           —William James Moore