Last night, in a lecture entitled “Religion and Freedom of Speech: Cartoons and Controversies,” Yale law professor David Boies provided insightful analysis of the tensions between freedom of speech and the regulation of offensive material.

Post focused on the recent controversy over twelve editorial cartoons depicting the Islamic prophet Muhammad. Rather than arguing whether the Danish paper was correct in publishing them, he discussed what the legal repercusions should have been, in relation to both European and American law, and how this issue is representative of a very basic tension existing in all democracies.

Among many other things, Post made the point that America stands basically alone in not prohibiting offensive language. This seemed like a very interesting point to make in light of the recent New York decision to outlaw the use of the n-word. While this issue wasn’t addressed this evening, it seems to me a basic violation of the First Amendment, for even though there is no set punishment for the violation of this law as of yet, the proclamation of the uttering of a single word as a crime seems to be treading on very thin ice. What’s even more interesting, though, is that there appears to be a lack of discussion about this seemingly controversial resolution that was enacted by the New York City Council at the very end of February. But there seems to be almost no controversy, though I would think that people (of all races, as all races are subject to constitutional law and entitled to all its freedoms) would be questioning or at least talking about it because, whether or not you agree with the decision, this is a big step to take in the U.S.

The question of regulating the printed and spoken word has been addressed over and over in every democracy. Post says that this is because part of the theory of democracy is based on self-governing from the People—and this can only occur if there is a free public discourse, which requires a substantial freedom of speech. These are issues that are pressing and deserve serious thought, not only from brilliant minds such as Robert Post, but from all whose lives are affected by these laws. So whatever your stance on the matter is, I hope you think about the role of speech in our democracy, and I certainly hope that Post isn’t the last to talk about it.