Free speech for everyone

  • Follow Letters

Much has been made recently about the subject of free speech, in particular the statements made by Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty fame.

Many agree with his comments. Many disagree with his comments. But I remind all that the concept of free speech as put forth by the Founding Fathers was never intended to protect speech we agree with. It was intended to protect speech we disagree with – the idea being that, in the public square, good ideas will rise and poor ideas will fall.

By silencing ideas and speech we disagree with, we remove the dynamic of debate from the public square. Granted, no one has the right to yell “fire” in a crowded theater, but every free person has a right to his or her own beliefs. Moreover, they have a constitutional right to espouse those beliefs whether we agree with them or not.

If anyone would deny someone their right of free speech, then would they be willing to give up that very same right for themselves? I think not.

William Davis

Augusta

Comments (9) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
paulbaughman28
215
Points
paulbaughman28 01/06/14 - 02:00 am
3
0
This...

This is, without a doubt, the best Opinion I have EVER heard on the subject.

myfather15
55764
Points
myfather15 01/06/14 - 08:20 am
5
1
Because it's a common sense opinion!!

It makes perfect sense!! My only point would be, when have you seen conservatives attempting to reign in free speech? When do you see conservatives, attending leftist speeches on college campuses, shouting them down? When do you see conservatives, calling for someone to be fire for controversial comments? Even during Martin Bashir's disgusting comments about Sarah Palin, most conservatives CALLED it disgusting, but didn't call for his termination!!

I pay a LOT of attention to news and politics, as most of you on here do as well. I haven't seen mainstream conservatives attempting to silence people's free speech!! Matter of fact, the ONLY group I can think of is the radical idiots at Westboro "Church".

The attempted silencing of free speech, usually comes from the left, as is factual throughout history!! It has always been leftist regimes which took over media outlets and silenced the people. Using children as props for their agenda, to disguise their intentions as "compassion".

The "tolerant" left, are only tolerant, if your beliefs and speech, align with theirs!! If not, they are extremely intolerant!!

Bulldog
1333
Points
Bulldog 01/06/14 - 10:55 am
2
1
Hate speech

The left's constant march to silence anyone who fails to agree with them shines through most brilliantly in the concept of so called "hate speech". It speaks for itself!

Truth Matters
7163
Points
Truth Matters 01/06/14 - 04:11 pm
1
2
I said at the time that Phil

I said at the time that Phil Robertson has a "fowl mouth" and I would add so does Martin Bashir. I am doing a search to see if any posters on AC who objected to Brashir's comments advocated for him keeping his job. On the surface I don't recall that being the case.

Robertson's employer or any other employer can determine what they will accept in behavior of an employee. Everywhere I have ever worked made it clear that there were consequences for saying certain things that might reflect negatively on the employer.

Should he have been fired? I don't think so, but neither should have Brashir. We have created a zero tolerance to some speech and exact the "death penalty" when it should be a teachable moment for our children and other adults.

teaparty
11313
Points
teaparty 01/06/14 - 05:20 pm
2
2
"Everywhere I have ever
Unpublished

"Everywhere I have ever worked made it clear that there were consequences for saying certain things that might reflect negatively on the employer."
TM, you are correct since A&E suspended Phil their products have sold out. Cracker Barrel & A&E's backing up looked like a duck coming in for a landing. It was hilarious.

deestafford
28721
Points
deestafford 01/06/14 - 08:24 pm
3
1
There was nothing inappropriate...

There was nothing inappropriate in the terms Phil used to describe the two points of the human anatomy he was comparing. They are the same terms used in sex education indoctrination classes our children receive in government schools. Believe me, there are some terms which could have been used to describe those body parts that would make your grandma swallow her snuff.

InChristLove
22481
Points
InChristLove 01/06/14 - 09:43 pm
2
1
TM, I do believe the

TM, I do believe the difference in Mr. Robertson's statement and Mr. Bashir's statement was Mr. Bashir's statement was a personal derogatory statement toward's a particular individual where as Mr. Robertson's comment was concerning the sinful behavior of a group of individuals (not a slander against a particular person). One was done has a hateful statement, the other was a general statement based on his religious beliefs according to scripture with no hateful intent.

So many differences in the two.

teaparty
11313
Points
teaparty 01/07/14 - 11:06 am
1
0
"So many differences in the
Unpublished

"So many differences in the two."
WHICH THE LIBERALS FAIL TO UNDERSTAND

corgimom
34176
Points
corgimom 01/07/14 - 09:50 pm
0
1
Anybody that thinks they can

Anybody that thinks they can say anything they want to in a workplace will quickly find themselves out of a job. You can say what you want; but the employer has the right to terminate you if they don't like what you say.

That's pretty much universal in America.

And the Robertson family is under contract to A&E- that they willingly signed- and all those contracts have clauses give the right to the employer to suspend or fire people for behavior that they find objectionable.

I found the whole uproar a bunch of nonsense over nothing, and was a publicity stunt.

iaaffg
2909
Points
iaaffg 01/10/14 - 09:15 am
1
0
mother goose was right

sticks n stones'll break me bones but names'll never hurt me....
this nation has become so thin-skinned, so ultra-sensitive, so wimpy, it's pathetic. as marilyn milian sez: say it, forget it; write it, regret it. c'mon america, grow some cojones, get a back bone, put on your big girl and big boy pants and get over getting your sphincter in a knot over spoken words that might not always align with your conception of what is 'right' and 'proper' all the time. you don't like what you hear, get some ear plugs!

Bulldog
1333
Points
Bulldog 01/21/14 - 09:27 am
0
0
Lest we forget

The freedom of speech concept as expressed in the 1st Amendment is only applicable to the federal government and by incorporation to the state governments. Several states have restated this concept within their own constitutions however, the application within local governments is less clear. There are numerous exceptions to the general concept within both state and federal governments and an employer may impose significant restrictions as a condition of employment. It is also clear that they do so at their own risk...

Back to Top

Top headlines

Partnerships needed in cyber sectors, NSA director says

Adm. Michael Rogers, director of the National Security Agency, said the nation's security rests on breaking down bariers between private and government sectors specializing in cyber defense. ...
Search Augusta jobs