Lyrics Of Hate Not In My CD Collection 

           Taking away a person's free speech, and ability to preach their own ideas is wrong, that is unless, what someone is saying is obscene, and inppropriate according to our society's standards. Only then is censorship justified, which would limit the First Amendment right that gives us all the right to say what we want. Instances such as 2 Live Crew and Marilyn Mansion being banned in certain sites for using profane and obscene lyrics during concerts are the perfect example of censorship in music.
          "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics" is a sticker placed on music albums that we are seeing more and more lately. That sticker does not prevent people from buying an album, but it gives a simple warning that you may not want your child listening to the explicit, or obscene lyrics present in songs. Even "clean" versions of these music albums can still send the smae message to the listener that it would if you listened to the unedited version. The real question is, should this message be available to an audience, even if it is sending obscene messages such as racial hatred, or abuse of women? Does a listener who hears a song over and over again going to realize what they are actually listening to is immoral, or is he just hearing and believing the message in the song? That is why some censorship of an artist's music and lyrics is justified and neccessary, even if it can be considered overwriting the First Amendment.
           2 Live Crew's obscenity lawsuit stands out above the rest in the area of music censorship cases in America. Rap group members Luther Campbell, Mark Ross, Chris Wongwon, and David Hobbs released the very controversial album, "As Nasty As They Wanna Be" in 1989. The album promoted violence, abusing women, and hate aganist particular racial groups. 2 Live Crew's album was banned from many record stores for the album's profanity and obscenity present in the lyrics. In reaction to this banning, 2 Live Crew filed their own lawsuit, in order that a judge could determine whether or not their album was considered obscene. "As Nasty As The Wanna Be" contained the "f" word two-hundred and twenty six times, referred to women as inappropriate names one-hundred and sixty three times, and had eighty references to sex. In 1990, Sheriff Navarro of Broward County, Florida urged record stores to remove the album from their shelves. Soon after, 2 Live Crew's label Skyywalker Records, filed a lawsuit stating that the sheriff's request violated their free speech rights. 
         Finally, in May of that year, a judge ruled As Nasty As They Wanna Be obscene under Florida obscenity laws. Sheriff Navarro went as far as to arrest a retailer who continued to sell the album after the court made its decision. He then went on to arrest three members of 2 Live Crew after they performed material from the album at a nightclub. It as not until three years later that 2 Live Crew won their appeal, when they United States Supreme Court refused to hear the case, giving them the right to rap and sell their music.
         I believe what Sheriff Navarro did was right according to the court's initial decision, before the 1993 ruling. 2 Live Crew's album was very clearly immoral according to our society's standards, and my own standards. If this album had been released as a "clean" version, there would be so many blanked out spaces in the songs from the inappropriate words, phrases and references, "As Nasty As They Wanna Be" would not even be considered an album.
       Another well-known lawsut aganist an artist was fought in 1985, when parents of John McCollum, who committed suicide while listening to Ozzy Osbourne's song "Suicide Solution." The parents blamed Osbourne for the death of their son. They sued Osbourne, but lost when their claim that the song inspired the son's death was ruled unrelated to shooting himself. The judge ruled that the lyrics were protected speech and that there was insufficient evidence to connect the song to the suicide. Osbourne had insisted that "Suicide Solution" was actually written putting down the concept of suicide.
       There was a similar case in 1990, when two families sued the band Judas Priest, claiming the band's 1978 release of "Stained Class", inspired the death of their two sons. The judge did find that the album promoted suicide, but did not see a connection between Judas Priest or their record, and the death of their two sons. Following this event, Judith Toth of Maryland's obscenity statutes, required a customer to present their identification before being allowed to buy any "obscene" material. In the end, her legislation was voted down.
       In cases like this, singer Marilyn Manson is another person that comes to mind. He has been banned from many areas for doing obscene thing in front of, and to his audience. Manson is another singer who has promoted violence over the years, including "The Death Song," "Disposable Teens", or "Coma Black." In my opinion, songs with titles, and the words they contain, such as the one listed above, as well as "Suicide Solution" have crossed the line of acceptable free speech. Any song that promoted horrid things such as suicide, genocide, discrimination, violecnce, or drugs should be banned from the radio waves, and taken off music shelves. Our society is always critical of the way the youth of today thinks, but when adults keep insisting that obscenity, abuse, and violence is "their right of free speech," you really have to wonder whom the real cause of how the youth thinks about the world.
       Music censorship has been in existence for at least a century. Even in the late 1800s censorship in music existed, including when "Bonnie Blue Flag" was banned after the Civil War because of its pro-Confederate theme. When you compare that event to the cases of today that attempt to ban song advocating beating up homosexuals, drugs, and killing, such as the lyrics present in some of Eminem songs, including "Purple Pills," "Kill You," and "Who Knew," it is very obvious times have changed.
       The First Amendment was written to protect the religious, political, and race rights of all people. It was never intended to a give music artist the right to encourage abusing women, suicide, drug use, gay bashing, or racial hatred. C. Delores Tucker, of the National Political Congress of Black Women agress, "The original intent of the First Amendment was to protect one to have freedom of religion and freedom to address their government. Not to carry filthy, harmful messages or do anything harmful to people." Music is a means of self-expression, but lyrics that send a message of hate, violence, obscenity, and pornography need to be censored.