POST SCRIPTS

Perhaps it's your idea that someone is abusing free speech. Remember the reasons we have free speech and why we are allowed to use it. If someone is expressing an opinion that doesn't meet yours it in no way means they are abusing their rights, it means they are actively USING them. If you want to mount opposition, give your opinion, and don't quickly jump to a point where rights are inhibited.

Homain, I am asking for your idea if someone is or is not abusing free speech. I posed the situations, I gave you a little legal background and I am asking for your opinion.

Jack, great post and interesting dilemma! I think in the pearcy's case, they were hoping to illicit a violent response, but it's their property and I guess they have the right.

I fly an American flag in front of my house, along with a blue star flag in the window.

I certainly don't want the likes of the Pearcy's to come to my house and try and tear it down. No, wait, belay that. Can you pass my address to the Pearcy’s, on second thought I would love to see them come to my house and try to tear it down!

From my point of view, regarding Rosie, she just showed herself to be ignorant.

I think her producers or the network she was on should have had a disclaimer, but there has been so much, non-governmental evidence to debunk the conspiracy on the twin towers and the pentagon, her claims just appeared crazy!

I think the audience saw her for what she was and it ultimately resulted in her leaving the show.

I've said it before, with the exception of the legal reasons you have laid out, e.g. Yelling, "Fire!" in a crowded theater etc., I censor the speech of those, whom I don't agree, with my radio knob, TV changer, my consumer dollars etc.

Homain wrote;
“Perhaps it's your idea that someone is abusing free speech. Remember the reasons we have free speech and why we are allowed to use it. If someone is expressing an opinion that doesn't meet yours it in no way means they are abusing their rights, it means they are actively USING them. If you want to mount opposition, give your opinion, and don't quickly jump to a point where rights are inhibited.”

I know you, Jack, and this would be the last thing you would want, you allow people of all beliefs to post on your blog, and masterfully debate the people with whose opinon you may disagree, but I think Homain makes an excellent point for those who would legislate the ability to freely express opinons, someone should send it to Harry Reid or Henry Waxman!

Well Jack, I think Justice Scalia has written some very interesting opinions on this topic as it pertains to flag burning.

Freedom of speech is vital to the security of our Republic. By the same token, holding people accountable for what they say is JUST as important. This notion that people should be able to say whatever they want with no consequences is ridiculous. But those consequences should come in the form of private (non-governmental), not public which is to say legislative action.

The laws we currently have governing free speech are, I think, sufficient to protect the innocent from slander or libel. Unfortunately we do not have greater competition amongst the established journalism community. Fox News has provided some alternative to what appeared to be a rather closed market just 10 years ago. This competition provides a form of oversight which is conducive to our founding principles.

To attempt to legislate speech, whether it be the ridiculous "hate speech" rules at universities or unpopular political speech runs contrary to the spirit of the First Amendment.

By the same token I do think the military has the right to restrict reporting in a war zone. And the executive branch does have a right to restrict classified information through the congress.

Unfortunately people are taking less and less responsibility for their actions, and this translates to their speech. It is the responsibility of citizens to correct this by utilizing their freedom of speech and assembly.

In the end we must remeber that the first amendment was established to protect unpopular speech, not popular.

I think the real problem we are facing is the loss of shame in America. Irresponsible speech is simply a logical outworking of this phenomena. When people subscribe to a series of beliefs which ignore, or refute objective truth and morality, it only makes sense that it will greatly diminish a sense of shame. Without shame, or embarrassment, how are we to maintain any sense of propriety, intellectual honesty, or common decency? The short answer is that we cant, at least in an objective sense.

I do not see any appropriate way we can regulate speech to address this problem with out fundamentally weakening this right for those who do not use it irresponsibly. I would suggest that we deal with the source of the problem (a lack of propriety and intellectual responsibility)through advocacy, protest and good parenting.

Jack I have to heartily agree with Nick. We would do ourselves, and perhaps the entire world that we inspire, a great deal of harm if we altered our national position on free speech.

I believe the real problem is the way we (as a society) gave in to the "anything goes" mentality of the leftist activists from the mid- fifties to late seventies. It's one thing to allow free speech, it's another to roll over and let a single minority point of view become the only voice. The left squeaky wheel just kept rolling along and the rest of us became the dirt path under that wheel...passive and worn out!

The process we are now going through to turn this back is difficult. Those of us who can must speak out strongly. If we continue to apply pressure and remind people that citizenship and freedom demand and require responsibility, we can restore some much needed balance to the free speech arena.

Citizenship has not been sufficiently taught in the last twenty to thirty years. It must be taught and practiced and it must be nurtured in future generations. We also need to balance awareness of our rights with a healthy dose of pride in and appreciation for the responsibilities of citizenship.

I guess the ultimate answer to your question is....NO, we shouldn't be tolerant of people who disrespect our soldiers, our flag, our president, our constitution, our religions...our country. We should speak up loudly and fight back for the people and things we hold dear.

Right now I think the squeeky wheelers are going a bit bonkers...they are no longer tolerated...I think it's making them cranky, to say the least.

Tina, you, Nick and John have cornered the market on everything I was going to say. Now I have to come up with something else. Ok, if there is to be a something else, then it is this:

We must not be so hesitant to have a declared war in the future. If we had invoked a declared war against Al Qeada after 9/11 it would have covered a number of security issues that many in Washington are quibling over today.

We would not have to alter anything that has not been either fully enumerated in the Constitution or accepted as past practice and fully justified in previous wars. Actually there is only a minor difference to the power of the Presidency in a declared war. No surrendering of rights, no over extensions of search warrants need apply, but it would have made the slightly more accountable in what they printed relative to national security and military secrets. It might have also made the media, TV and radio more accountable for irresponsible persons like O'Donnell.

Thats about I can think of to add and I wasn't even going to go there, but you guys did too good a job on nailing down everything else!

Please also note that Charlie Brown the CD4 Dem candidate showed up at rallies in SUPPORT of this!!!

Get the word out!

Please also note that Charlie Brown the CD4 Dem candidate showed up at rallies in SUPPORT of this!!!

We'll add Charlie and the Pearcys to the list of people who should be required to face our troops each day with their "expressions" of protest. Let them listen to the stories our soldiers have to tell. Nick may be right though, without a sense of shame they probably wouldn't get it.

Here's a question. Is it possible to feel true compassion without a healthy sense of shame?