Dear Editor:

There seems to be some confusion as to what is acceptable behavior and what is not. There are court rulings as to what free speech means and what it does not mean. Two are – “To incite actions that would harm others - To make or distribute obscene materials.” The question is whether an obscene phone call that directs the recipient to record and distribute the obscene message falls under what is not covered by the First Amendment.

There are also definitions of the words “racist” and “racism” each having a history of origination and use. A racist is defined by Miriam Webster as “A person who believes in racism, the doctrine that one's own racial group is superior or that a particular racial group is inferior to others.” Oxford Dictionaries states, “A person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another"

Miriam Webster provides two definitions for “racism”: “Simple racism: poor treatment of or violence against people because of their race: the belief that some races of people are better than others.” “Full racism: 1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race; 2: racial prejudice or discrimination.”

What is most interesting is that these two words were first coined and placed in use between 1932 and 1933. They were not used before, during or immediately after the right to own slaves.

The definitions aid our understanding of the terms and reasons why others interpret some actions would rightly be defined as actions of a racist. They cannot, however, define what is felt by or intended by the person using words that would fall in line with the definition of a racist. Whether a court of law would conclude intentional use or the court of public opinion concludes intentional, inappropriate use of obscene and racist language is unknown.

What is known is that we are all members of the human race, making us equal in the eyes of God and the U.S. Constitution.

Jarryl Larson

Edgecomb