DnA 9-14: How Free is Free Speech?
by: ·lue ·alls
The question about limitations on rights seems to always arise...therefore it is no surprise that I bring up a rather old question and come up with some new answers. Free speech has always been a right that Americans were proud of, something that all humans should have, being the right to say anything without the fear of persecution. Unfortunately even in the U.S. there are limitations or restrictions that blatantly conflict with freedom of speech.
In the U.S. Bill of Rights it clearly states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech." In another document it says that no person can publicly or privately threaten the President of the United States. Is it just me or is there a slight conflict between the two statements above? It isn't that I believe that anyone should go and threaten the President, but I have always believed that the highest power of law in America was not the judicial system, but in fact the U.S. Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution. Wouldn't the act of taking away the right to speak badly of the President abridge the freedom of speech? I think so and I know others do also. If I threatened the common person I couldn't be arrested unless there was probable cause yet I could be arrested for threatening the President even if I was joking about it and there was no probable cause. The first amendment basically says that the freedom of speech can not be changed in any way therefore this law should be removed.
Other laws such as the law that states it is illegal to offend an officer of the law should also be addressed. If I went up to a cop and called him a piece of shit I can legitimately be arrested. Isn't that an obvious form of freedom of speech? As an American that supposedly has all of those wonderful rights written up in the U.S. Constitution I should be able to go up to a cop and voice my opinion about him.
On June 21, 1989 the Supreme Court ruled that burning an American Flag is a form of free speech, and although some people may not approve of it they can't do shit about it because of the first amendment in the U.S. Bill of Rights. If burning a U.S. flag can be considered perfectly legal then why are making a threat to the president or offending an officer illegal?
How the hell do these laws get passed if they infringe on the rights guarantied on the rights guarantied by the U.S. Constitution? Thank Congress for passing these laws. Congress has the power to make and pass laws, but the President has to approve them. Even if the President does veto the law congress can still pass it with a 2/3 majority vote. The question is why would 2/3 of Congress vote for an unconstitutional law, well the answer is money. Congress has been corrupt for a long time and with corruption comes greed. So if someone wants a law passed it can usually get passed if they have enough support and money.
The government has gone too far. In 1776 or incredible document was created that guarantied any U.S. citizen a proper government that allowed many freedoms. Now the government works hard to try to change the past and so far I think they have succeeded.
Since the mid 1900s Congress has slowly made new laws that take away some of the rights that all Americans are entitled to according to the Constitution. These new laws put limitations and restrictions on our rights. Are we going to stand for this shit? I hope not because if we are as passive as we've been in the past we are going to end up with no rights or freedoms. The government will transform into a communist system. You have the power to change the future so be prepared to fight for your rights.
·lue ·alls
