View Single Post
Old 02-10-2006, 01:50 PM   #44 (permalink)
meembo
Junkie
 
meembo's Avatar
 
Location: Connecticut
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
The point of a protest is so that people, usually a specific group of people, hears you. The anti-abortion crowd does not protest in front of the catholic church because they don't need to get their message across to the catholic church. They protest in front of places where they know people have opinions that they want to change.

If we limit where someone can protest, we are placing restrictions on their freedom of expression. If we start down that path, who knows how bad it will get before someone wises up and turns it around?
shakran, I think you are advocating an absolute literal interpretation of the first amendment, and in your arguments you are ignoring accomodations the courts have already determined are appropriate to limit speech. Free speech is already abridged in ways most of society has accepted.

Abortion protesters don't expect to change opinions at clinics. They hope to generate media coverage which broadcasts their agenda as widely as possible. They are moved far enough from the clinic so as not to impede patients from seeing their doctors. That is a ligitimate restriction of political and religious expression. No one has moved them "20 miles from Faribault" in the 30 years since Roe v. Wade.

Obscenity, defamation, sedition, and hate speech are not protected speech. They are illegal expressions of speech. They are punishable offenses. I think that it's wise that the constitution has the flexibility to accomodate social conditions that weren't considered when the Constitution and the original Bill of Rights were drafted. The Bill of Rights was the first exercise of this flexibility.

This is the major flaw in your arguments in this thread IMO. I agree to a great extent with most of what you are saying, but you present the first amendment as as absolute that can never be approached legally. It has been approached from several angles, and at appropriate times the Supreme Court ruled that some forms of speech are improper and unlawful. I hope that you can admit that there is some room for accomodation as society changes.
__________________
less I say, smarter I am
meembo is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360