express yourself

            
             Try to imagine your life without your favorite music. Imagine a world in which our government dictates what we can and cannot listen to in the privacy of our own homes. In some countries this reality exists; however, in the United States, we have the right to free speech, as mandated by the first amendment. As a result, most people believe that as Americans we can say or listen to anything we choose. According to Paul D. Fischer in his article titled "What if They Gave a Culture War and Nobody Came," the Supreme Court deemed that there are three areas of speech that fall outside first amendment protection; they are, speech that is obscene, causes harm to minors, or incites crimes (1). As a result, free speech is limited and often times censored in this gray area created by the Supreme Court. Since a significant portion of popular music uses controversial lyrics, it often becomes a target of censor advocates. I agree that, under the guidelines of the Supreme Court, people should be held responsible for the consequences of what they say; however, I do not think that musical expression should be limited by any of the exceptions to free speech.
             Because music is not fully protected by the first amendment, many artists have been banned from performing live in many cities and states. Marilyn Manson, for example, has had numerous concerts canceled by state and local governments in places such as Utah, Idaho, and Texas. Of the states where they had concerts canceled, Utah was the most extreme. The band was successfully banned from playing anywhere in the state after the singer shredded a bible on stage. While many claimed the act was "obscene," and "harmful to minors," I would argue that from an artistic perspective, the act of shredding the bible embodied everything their music stands for, and therefore, simply an extension of the music. Many other artists have been banned under the same legal reasoning, including Eminem, Ozzy Osborne and Slayer.