If Vile Rap Protected By First Amendment, Why Not News Analysis?
For daring to critique the life of a rapper that probably lived like a reprobate to begin with, the foremost ethicists and theoreticians of jurisprudence of the era in which we live such as Justin Bieber are calling for the firing of Fox News pundit Laura Ingraham.
For decades now, those mired in the lifestyle extolled by this musical genre have chipped away at what remains of American’s moral fabric by emphasizing if it feels good do it mindset irrespective of human life, traditional social relationships, and even law and order.
Thus, who are these barely literates to tell Laura Ingraham what she can and cannot say?
For does not the same First Amendment that allegedly allows the hurling of the vilest of obscenities on the grounds of giving voice to the plight of urban youth also protect Laura Ingraham in articulating her own moral and social vision?
For years, those on both sides of the racial divide concerned about the corrosion of standards often exhibited by popular music were told that, if they did not like what they heard, then don’t listen.
If so, why is Fox News obligated to pander to those likely not even watching the channel in the first place?
Frederick Meekins is an independent theologian and social critic. Frederick holds a BS in Political Science/History, a MA in Apologetics/Christian Philosophy from Trinity Theological Seminary, and a PhD. in Christian Apologetics from Newburgh Theological Seminary.
Cover
•
Commentary
•
Books & Reviews
•
Climate Change
•
Site Links
•
Feedback
