For The Love of All That Is America, Learn What the First Amendment Is…
Crossposted from Part-Time Pundit:
Throughout the cartoon controversy people on both sides talk about free speech and a free press. While in general, these can be construed as the freedom to say what you want, people are conflating Constitutional protections with the idea that one shouldn’t face any consequences to their speech.
Free speech, but more specifically, the Constitutional protection of free speech has absolutely nothing to do with private individuals and what they can do. The First Amendment is not a protection from your fellow citizens (or foreigners). It is a protection against what the government can do, and the government alone.
When the Dixie Chicks protested that people were boycotting their music, they claimed Free Speech. No one said they didn’t have the right to say what they did; they were saying they weren’t going to continue giving them money if they wanted to engage in that behavior. This is perfectly legal and why our country is so great. We don’t need the government to create hate speech laws here; the free market system largely takes care of the problem. Yes, you have a right to say stupid things, but that doesn’t mean you have the right to continue to get subsidized by the public if you do. This is the lesson that the creators of “Book of Daniel” learned.
When Islamic radicals (who are the minority) burn down embassies and threaten violence, it is shameful behavior. You don’t protest the stereotype of being a fanatical murder by being a fanatical murder. However, Muslims hacking websites is not a Constitutional issue. There are laws to prevent it, sure. It’s bad behavior, sure. But it is not an attack on the First Amendment. It is high time people on both sides realize what the First Amendment is and what it is not.
Email This
Posted by Gribbit on February 15, 2006 11:33 am
» Filed Under 1st Amendment, News, War On Terror
Trackback URL:
- Stray Dog Found: I Am a Punk, It's True
Comments
6 Responses to “For The Love of All That Is America, Learn What the First Amendment Is…”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Call me stupid (You will not be the first…) but I honestly have a hard time understanding how Muslim extremists trying to shut down webpages with the cartoons on them is anything but an assault upon the First Ammendment. Ignoring/walking away from/voting with your dollar/etc. someone you do not agree with (as with the Dixie Chicks) is one thing… Threatening someone in order to prevent them from saying/posting something? That goes beyond the realm of “consequences of your words”…
Have you even read the 1st Amendment? It says: “Congress shall make no law [snip] abridging the freedom of speech [snip]” It DOES NOT apply to private individuals. It only says what CONGRESS can and cannot do. If I disagree with what you have to say and you post to my site, I can delete/edit your comments as I see fit. While it may be unethical, it is not illegal for me to “adjust” your comments.
The problem we have in this country is that, not enough people understand or have even read the constitution. You are right about the Freedom of Speech. The Muslim attacks on individuals for posting cartoons are not violations of your freedom of speech, but it might cause some backboneless countries to pass laws that WOULD violate those rights. Lets just hope thats not the case in this country.
Gotcha, Sarge. As I said, I was being stupid at the time
.
Although, there is a considerable difference between editing comments placed upon your private site, and people threatening you and your webpage because of your posts.
*shrugs* I guess I still see the latter as an assault upon the concept of free speech, though not an attack upon the First Ammendment… I just blur the two together sometimes.
Right, the first amendment protects us from our government.
That does not mean that the MSM should self-censor and show restraint ONLY when they are threatened by violence by Muslim radicals. Do we really want foreign radicals to control our press by threats of violence?
We are in a rare moment of agreement here. Censorship can only be done by the government. Anybody private individual can tell you to shut up and make it stick if they have the power. It’s bad form. It’s unethical. It may even break a law or two, but it’s not 1st Amendment censorship.