ugh for prohibiting it. Because of this, we often find out society struggling to interpret the First Amendment in order to protect freedom of speech while remaining a community of individuals who have respect for each other. This is the main conflict that arises when we are confronted with issues like the one discussed by Bok “We are faced with a clear example of the conflict between our commitment to free speech and our desire to foster a community founded on mutual respect. Our society has wrestled with this problem for many years” (44).
Despite disapproving of these kinds of displays personally, Bok argues that censorship is dangerous and difficult to implement because of the difficulty in deciding which forms of communication are so offensive to others that they warrant prohibition, and just as difficult is determining who should make these decisions. Further, Bok (45) also feels that censorship and prohibition of communication or free speech is dangerous for society no matter how offensive some of these communications may be “If we begin to forbid flags, it is only a short step to prohibiting speakers. I suspect no community will become human and caring by restricting what its members can say. The worst offenders will simply find other ways to irritate and insult.”
Before coming to the close of his argument wherein he outlines proactive measures for dealing with offensive displays and forms of communication, Bok takes a swipe at the way the media in America are often responsible for highlighting and underscoring offensive forms of communication. For example, he argues that if certain displays or forms of communication are prohibited, then those who wish it is to offend will spend much energy and effort trying to discover ways to work around these prohibitions. Further, he feels these efforts will draw the attention of the media to the offensive form of communication, thereby, exacerbating its effect on the Ame...