Freedom of speech

The right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.

I find myself sqeezed in an interesting dilemma; seeded and grown merely in my little head – triggered through an incident at a work meeting that left me pondering and rather inbalanced about my own views.

As a liberal and true democratic centered American, I treat my job assignments even in foreign lands from a basis of integrated US constitutional rights perspectives; a set of all inclusive human rights and (young) regulatory principals that within her complicity are well thought out, debated and defined by many brilliant minds. The US constitution.

I often find myself alert in a quench between the restrictive laws of other lands and my personal approach to silently guide from a set of citizen amendments. My respect for the home constitution outlining my roam of actions have defined a comfortable boundary wherein I act, think and find rectification when reflecting upon odd experiences and finding resolutions for confrontations and peace as a kind person.

In reverse: When people from other places arrive in the US, they bring with them “home-grown” habits and reflect their philosophical views that sometimes confront my set perspectives.

I was told once not to talk to others about things that bother me or affect me at my workplace; to not “steer-up” my emotional driven urge to voice my specific views but furthermore “report” my concerns or doubts to the manager instead… This at first seems such an absurd request; oppressing my first amendment rights but clearly, as it has been tested through every levels of the US court system I indeed have no legal protection for freedom of speech as employee of for-profit and non-profit corporations and other non-governmental employers.
Worth: The freedom of employers to terminate employment at any time, for any reason means that employees in private industry have no legal rights to freedom of speech.
Simply; as a private citizen who is not in the public eye, the law extends a lesser degree of constitutional protection to the Managers statements at issue.

And here starts my ponder. I manifested over the nearly 60 years of my existence to a standard of living that respects the constitution as a “rough-draft” designed for an intellectual elite with a dose of moral principals and a healthy respect for the living and Mother earth, that no law fairly includes the extremes on either end of a philosophical perspective. Yes, you can call your mom an “asshole” and a many groups test their “freedom” with extreme use or abuse to force defined outlines of the original drafts of our constitution; enforcing referendum, amendments and creating popular initiative. I’m however bothered by the fact of confrontation in the middle of these extremes when told at my workplace that I shall not express opinion, critique or compulsive notions as this would jeopardize my employment… And it could.

Looking upon the current political turmoil with this experience in mind: it defines precisely the mood and dismay of the odd scenario of competing aspirations to the Presidency on the republican ticket and in the growing mass of demonstrations about the dislike in discrepancies of power and wealth in this country. 98 percent of the people in today’s US Senate are registered millionaires debating if the richest could contribute with a larger tax participation to bail out our failing economy, while 98 percent of the population make up the “reality” of an average income group that has long seen their unreachable chances of the American dream erased.

What we have is the right to voice our opinion, to debacle and share our dismay possibly from a perspective of adapting to ideas, changes and contributing through this process in finding appeasing solutions. Any restrictions within a group or from the rein of leadership position is a very clumsy and uncomfortable idea for creating a work environment that invites for trust and respect. Communication is encouraged; any debate with fists and weapon or under “threat” is too simple for my person.

It is a young Nation in comparison; even the multiple definitions are fresh scares of tested ideas… I do believe that voicing my every thought has liberated me from becoming an introverted recluse. I respect the idea of discipline and decorum too much and strive for medium; a comfortable balance – although constantly curious about the edges of my roam…

Leave a Reply