It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by EktoPlazm
I think freedom of speech is a two-way street. Sure, Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher and others can say anything they desire (as long as they do not incite others to panic or commit criminal conspiracy), but other people have a right to protest, boycott and even petition the networks to cancel their programs. Freedom of speech does not guarantee silence from an audience or the support of a media network. If Rush Limbaugh and Bill Maher want to continue freely exercising their freedom of speech by saying stupid things, fine, but they can do so without a radio or television program, if that is the will of the people and the networks.
Originally posted by imherejusttoread
reply to post by Damrod
Like all basic rights, freedom of speech is dependent on property rights. Whoever owns the property the speech is being conveyed on is the ultimate arbitrator on what's allowed to be said. Private property = private property owners' rules. Public property = public property owners', which is us, and is detailed in the many constitutions we have for it, and then tweaked/fixed through the democratic process, whether it be legislation from the senate or judicial review from the courts, etc.,
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy. U.S. Supreme Court, West Virginia Board of Education vs. Barnette,
The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now. – U.S. Supreme Court, South Carolina v. United States, 199 U.S. 437, 448
The framers of the Constitution employed words in their natural sense; and where they are plain and clear, resort to collateral aids to interpretation is unnecessary and cannot be indulged in to narrow or enlarge the text.
-U.S. Supreme Court, McPherson v. Blacker
I cannot assent to the view, if it be meant that the legislature may impair or abridge the rights of a free press and of free speech whenever it thinks that the public welfare requires that it be done. The public welfare cannot override constitutional privilege. U.S. Supreme Court, Patterson v. Chicago
If there is any principle of the constitution that more imperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought – not free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate. United States v. Schwimmer
Emergency does not increase granted power or remove or diminish the restrictions imposed upon power granted or reserved. The Constitution was adopted in a period of grave emergency. Its grants of power to the federal government and its limitations of the power of the States were determined in the light of emergency, and they are not altered by emergency. – U.S. Supreme Court, Home Building & Loan Assn v. Blairsdell,
The liberty of the press is not confined to newspapers and periodicals. It necessarily embraces pamphlets and leaflets. These indeed have been historic weapons in the defense of liberty, as the pamphlets of Thomas Paine and others in our history abundantly attest. -U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Lovell v. City of Griffin
All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void. – U.S. Supreme Court, Marbury vs Madison
The right to defy an unconstitutional statute is basic in our scheme. Even when an ordinance requires a permit to make a speech, to deliver a sermon, to picket, to parade, or to assemble, it need not be honored when it's invalid on its face. – Potter Stewart, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Walker v. Birmingham
Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence –U.S. Supreme Court, Mapp vs. Ohio
The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of man than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism – U.S. Supreme Court, Ex Parte Milligan