One of the most continuous and fierce arguments in society is free speech and what it comprises. Free speech is one of the pillars of our democracy; thus, why it is included in the First Amendment. Everyone says they love freedom of speech and are its ardent defenders. But, that stance often gets tested when the free speech is contrast to one's beliefs or that speech is controversial.
A frequent issue that arises is the role of non-political public figures and their free speech and its permissiveness. Some people from news "commentators" to "regular average joes" seem to feel celebrities and athletes should keep to themselves their social and political beliefs. Often critics and detractors will utter phrases such as: "Shut up and dribble"; "Stick to acting"; "Just entertain"; "Stay in your lane". These critics and detractors apparent position is essentially these people are politically novice, if not ignorant, and should refrain from offering opinions. They feel celebrities and athletes, for lack of a better term, should be seen and not heard.
At best these arguments are specious. At worst they are unabashedly hypocritical. These critics issue seemingly isn't public figures expressing their opinions; it is the opinions they express.
These critiques of celebrities and athletes often come from the political right. It is no coincidence that the public figures who often speak out are from (but not exclusively) the political left.
The detractors will almost always defend themselves by saying, "Everyone has the right to free speech but these people often are not well versed in the subjects they address" or something similar in nature. The fallacies of that defense are it's frequently false and it reeks hypocrisy. These same people daily critique and bemoan athletes, actors, and entertainers' performances and works. It is a societal staple. These detractors would bristle and take great offense if an athlete said, "Hey, You, stick to painting and not worry about my batting average." They would be extremely chaffed if an actor snapped, "Listen, Skippy. You just keep snaking that shit out of toilets and stay in your lane." If past reactions are an accurate indicator when similar comments have been made, the immediate reaction would be, "I have a right to say what I want. I pay your salary." The somewhat fallaciousness of the salary paying claims aside those people would be rightfully offended. They have a right to criticize because they're paying customers.
Well, athletes and celebrities are voters. They are United States citizens. The same issues that affect other Americans affect them.
But, a counterpoint to that argument from the critics is this almost asinine assertion that these figures are rich so why should they care so much. On its face it is an absurd argument. As stated earlier, much of this opposition comes from the right, so it's right leaning policies that usually come under fire. Lately, it is the current administration's policies and proposals that are the criticism recipients.
Why the position is so silly and quite frankly intellectually dishonest is because it implies, if not ostentatiously asserts, wealthy people shouldn't care about poor people or social issues. Many celebrities and certainly athletes feel it's an obligation to care about the disenfranchised because before they became wealthy they were disenfranchised. They feel it is their civic duty to give back to their communities. Many of them feel because they are rich it is their civic and Christian duty to protect and speak for those who don't have a voice. They believe it is an obligation to take advantage of their platform to better the lives of the less fortunate.
So, if speaking out or railing against policies and/or people whom they perceive are inflicting harm or undue strife on the less fortunate will provide the aforementioned less fortunate a voice, it is their right to do it. It is their right to freedom of speech and their right to protest as an American citizen.
It is rather pretentious for anyone to feel it is they who decide whom does and doesn't have the right to express their free speech. That is not how the Constitution works. The idea that athletes and celebrities should not, because of their wealth, speak their minds literally drips with irony and hypocrisy. The notion that these public figures shouldn't concern themselves with social issues and injustices, aside from ironically being blatantly elitist, is fervently febrile ignorance.
Free speech is not free. Even though free speech's price does not include arrest, prosecution and imprisonment it is often rather pricey. But, regardless of the price it may carry, the right to free speech is the one thing we all can afford. It is not a privilege; it's a right! You may not like what everyone's speech is, but if you are a true defender and believer of American ideals and principles you must respect their right to express it.
And, for the right-wingers who are thinking I am just "attacking" them, be patient. I am coming after the leftists over free speech in the next day or so.
