Certain things in the world have gotten out of control lately. One, at the top of my list, is the treatment of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment guarantees all Americans five definite rights and privileges.

The right to practice any religion we wish, the right of free speech, freedom of the press, freedom to peacefully assemble, and the freedom to petition the government are all sitting atop The Bill of Rights.

However, people have begun to call for the restriction of these rights without actually understanding what they mean.

The First Amendment is a contract between the government and the American people. It basically gives us the right to express ourselves without fear of punishment, access to information and protection from prior restraint (censorship).

The most important right we have is freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech gives us the ability to discover truth. By having access to information, all American people have a way to judge error and make reasonable decisions.

Freedom of the press gives us a check on the government’s power. The media are often referred to as the fourth branch of government. The media allow us to keep up to date on what the government is doing. A prime example of this is the Washington Post’s investigation of the Watergate scandal.

The American public, through countless surveys, insists that the media and press have too much freedom. They insist that the press should be controlled and that journalists should be licensed before they can do their job.

If the press were censored or regulated, the public would have nothing to talk about. No scandals would be uncovered, no details about military action would be revealed and there would be nothing good on TV. People would have their right to information denied.

The misconception most people have about the First Amendment is that people can do whatever they want and get away with it — even if it is disrespectful, tasteless or harmful.

This is where they are wrong.

Though the government can’t control expression based on content alone, officials can control the time, place, and manner in which expression happens.

There is no absolute freedom of expression. Speech can be restricted or censored depending on the type of speech, the speaker and where it takes place.

Long ago the Supreme Court decided there are three levels of protection for speech.

The first and most protected is political speech. The second is commercial speech such as advertisements. The third and least protected is obscenity and fighting words.

Who though, can determine what is obscene?

If an Ohio State student wants to wear a shirt that says “F Michigan” on the front of it, he or she has the right to do so. They are expressing themselves.

So then what gives another person the right to say that a student can’t wear that shirt because it is offensive?

Nothing.

Just because one or two people find something distasteful or offensive is not enough to deem something obscene.

Every day, people write letters to the editor’s of newspapers across the county complaining about someone saying this, or complaining that Ted H. Newswriter’s story is biased or unethical.

Guess what?

If it weren’t for the First Amendment, people couldn’t write those letters.

People say pornography should be regulated better because it is offensive and degrading to women.

It would be different if these people lived in a mandatory porn-viewing section of town, but they don’t.

Don’t watch or read the stuff, and it won’t bother you.

Most controversy over the First Amendment, freedom of expression, and obscenity can be explained by the increasing lack of morals and ethics that people are growing up with today.

But, before I say anything that someone might find offensive, I think I’ll take the Fifth.

Erik Bussa is a senior in agricultural communications. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].