01-01-2008, 03:56 PM
Hi everyone,
I've kept out of this particular discussion because I can totally understand Peter's point of view. But, something that seems to have forgotten is that we do not in fact have an absolute right to free speech and the government does in fact impose limits on it. For example, we as individuals do not have the right to yell fire and cause chaos in a crowded movie theater when there is no danger whatsoever to be found.
Yes, it could be as construed that we should be allowed to do so because of the constitution. Someone who does it could say, "Hey, I'm expressing myself. I yelled "Fire!" in an artistic manner and was taking an advantage of an opportunity to demonstrate my acting skills in front of an audience!" But, only an absolute moron would think he/she could get away with it. (Yes, it is a ridiculous example but it is as valid as it is inane).
Robert
I've kept out of this particular discussion because I can totally understand Peter's point of view. But, something that seems to have forgotten is that we do not in fact have an absolute right to free speech and the government does in fact impose limits on it. For example, we as individuals do not have the right to yell fire and cause chaos in a crowded movie theater when there is no danger whatsoever to be found.
Yes, it could be as construed that we should be allowed to do so because of the constitution. Someone who does it could say, "Hey, I'm expressing myself. I yelled "Fire!" in an artistic manner and was taking an advantage of an opportunity to demonstrate my acting skills in front of an audience!" But, only an absolute moron would think he/she could get away with it. (Yes, it is a ridiculous example but it is as valid as it is inane).
Robert