In Which the World is Turned Upside Down

Mar 06, 2011 19:40

A few moments ago I left a couple of comments on my former history teacher's Facebook in her discussion of the WBC Supreme Court decision on First Amendment freedoms, and it occurred to me that my stance is so skewed because of current day politics, I wouldn't have dreamed I'd be here ten years ago. Then again, I could say that for quite a few ( Read more... )

political, news, legal, opinion, supreme court

Leave a comment

Comments 5

crossfire March 7 2011, 17:15:06 UTC
I agree with the principle of the decision too. However I will admit that I find Alito's dissent to be compelling.

Reply

timsimms March 7 2011, 17:24:33 UTC
Agreed. I really believe there needs to be a new standard of privacy written into the BoR to encompass modern times (the internet, funerals, etc.). I haven't seen any cases though that would be strong enough to make those points though.

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

timsimms March 7 2011, 18:27:10 UTC
I'm hoping your comment is just as much a joke as my capitalism remark (as it was more a commentary on WBC's approach of alienating everyone, regardless of who or what they are).

And while I agree that vocal opposition is the foundation, I think it's a bit extreme to think of societal freedoms in black and white terms. That was partially the point of my line of thought - that while preservation of free speech should be paramount, it occasionally interferes with other individual liberties (such expectation of privacy in this instance).

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

timsimms March 7 2011, 18:46:27 UTC
This particular comment is exactly how I feel about the issue, though I'd tend to disagree that Lawrence v Texas is the primary/main privacy precedent (assumptive or otherwise). The entire issue of privacy will forever be debated though since it ultimately wasn't hard coded into the BoR.

Reply


madknits March 7 2011, 21:19:04 UTC
Wasn't it dear M. Voltaire who said, "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

I find the WBC to be reprehensible, and hope that all manner of bad things befall them. However, we cannot limit their freedom of speech without accepting those limits for ourselves. And I don't want my freedom of speech limited.

What the WBC does is disgusting, in poor taste, and morally indefensible. However, we can do the exact same thing, and when they protest in our neighbourhood, we can counter-demonstrate and hold up signs that ridicule them and mock them. Usually when people start laughing at them, rather than shouting at them, they tend to leave earlier than their announced time.

And while I hate that they can protest at funerals and at gay pride events, it means that I have the exact same right to protest them, and maybe make them look a little more stupid each time.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up