No Freedom to Threaten.


Celebrity status does not mean that a person can utter phrases that appear to threaten the safety of any individual or any home…especially the home of the President of the United States. What a devastating statement. This is strictly my opinion and I normally do not choose to enter into discussions involving controversial political viewpoints. However…I have reached my limit.


No More Patience.


Celebrity status does not mean that a person can speak in Washington D.C. (or any other public location) using disrespectful and crude language. If a person does not have enough grasp of their language to refrain from having to repeatedly use inappropriate words, then perhaps they should keep quiet. I am most assuredly not a prude and do not profess to have ever been the epitome of perfection. However, I do know how to give a speech without resorting to degrading verbiage. Remember…this is strictly my opinion. However…I have reached my limit.


No More Patience.


Celebrity status does not mean that a person can incite people to be a part of a revolution or a part of a rebellion. On 1/21/2017, the following words were spoken: “Welcome to the revolution of love. To the rebellion.” It is beyond my capability to clearly comprehend the distinct words “revolution of love” and “rebellion” used in such close proximity. The contradiction of these statements as well as the contradiction of these words is obvious. One definition of revolution states: a fundamental change in political organization; especially: the overthrow or renunciation of one government or ruler and the substitution of another by the governed (Merriam-Webster). Two definitions of rebellion state: 1. opposition to one in authority or dominance 2. open, armed, and usually unsuccessful defiance of or resistance to an established government (Merriam-Webster). I do not see the word love in these definitions. Remember…this is strictly my opinion. However, I have reached my limit.


No More Patience.


Celebrity status does not mean that a person can extend their personal interpretation of the Bill of Rights that were originally formulated by our Founding Fathers. Regarding Freedom of Speech, the free speech rules as outlined by the Supreme Court appear to reflect thinking and experience from 1910 to the current time. In regards to threats, it has been stated in the following way: Threats: Speech that is reasonably perceived as a threat of violence (and not rhetorical hyperbole) can be punished. Virginia v. Black (2003). Rhetorical hyperbole can be characterized as an exaggeration of ideas for the sake of emphasis. These words do not sound like hyperbole to me: “The revolution starts here. The fight for the right to be free, to be who we are, to be equal.” as well as “Change that will require sacrifice, people. Change that will require many of us to make different choices in our lives, but this is the hallmark of revolution.” Remember…this is strictly my opinion. However, I have reached my limit.


No More Patience.


Celebrity status does not mean that it is fine when a person refuses to maturely and graciously accept the results of the election of the President of the United States of America. The statement “good did not win this election” and the subsequent statement that has been perceived by many to be a threat to the White House…I personally find this offensive, disturbing and enveloped in hatred.


Madonna…you may be surprised to discover that you are free. It appears that you have been allowed to be whatever you want to be. You live in America. Where is your pride? ?

Remember…this is strictly my opinion. However, I have absolutely reached my limit.


No More Patience.


8 thoughts on “No Freedom to Threaten.

  1. I’m not American so I don’t know; but I agree with you. If people believe that there was an issue that renders the election result fraudulent then respectful, legal means of discussing & searching for solutions exist. I was always taught personal invective and use of shock language was proof of a lack of depth to your argument. Your founder’s lived by strong codes of personal behaviour, freedom of speech works; in my opinion, only when people have self respect and respect for others.


  2. Total agreement! Once someone is our president, as much as we dislike their policies, they are still our president. If they don’t want him as their president perhaps they should find a country that better fills their needs. Their only problem is, this is the only country that would allow them to rant and act like a 2 year old pitching a fit.
    I am aiming to continue to pray for the President and also for those who are filled with so much hate that they cannot see any good in anyone who thinks differently than they do.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Amen to that! I so agree with you. I understand if one does not like the election results, but regardless… he’s in office, so the only thing we can do is let our voices be heard, but RESPECTFULLY SO….otherwise, WE aren’t ANY better than what he’s accused of.
    A Hate speech isn’t going to solve anything, but stir up MORE HATE. We just celebrated MLK Day, but it seems most people have seemed to forget his METHODS, as well as his MESSAGE.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s