Political correctness gone too far

“Under the First Amendment, Congress can make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting its free exercise, or abridging freedom of speech or press or the right to assemble and petition for redress of grievances.” This is one of our most precious rights, giving us the right to speak wisely, foolishly, as a bigot, racist, pro-choice/life, as a homophobe, heterophobe or pro/con feminism. It also gives us the responsibility to defend another’s right to make a fool of himself. I may disagree with what you say, but I am morally and legally bound to defend your right to say it – to the death. But then, I have a right to refute you, as well. In the Indiana Daily Student for Friday, March 21, the story of Keith J. Sampson was reported by Sara Amato. Mr. Sampson was charged with “racial harassment” for reading a history book checked out of the IUPUI library titled “Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan,” by Todd Tucker. Sampson’s crime? Reading it in front of fellow employees who were black thus creating a “hostile atmosphere of antagonism.” This would be just ludicrous if it was not so dangerous. Using this same logic, a Muslim reading the Koran on break in front of Christians or atheists would be just as guilty. This scenario can be played out ad infinitum. But what it amounts to is that we have institutionalized “Thought Police” whose job it is to insure everyone thinks, speaks and writes only politically, morally, racially, religiously and politically correct thoughts. We have accepted the premise of the “Doctrine of Overriding Outrage” which is that some group(s) have decided for the rest of us that certain issues and ideas are so significant that there is no point in discussing them any longer (e.g.: religion, race, sex, politics). Calm dispassionate (even passionate analysis is a waste of time). They ask, ‘Why tolerate ideas that are so obviously wrong?’” \nIt is time to restore freedom.