Defending Free Speech

I have not been the kind of person who varnishes anything. Sometimes I am brutely honest. I don’t set out to insult or offend anyone; I just don’t believe in beating around the bush. The First Amendment states, in relevant part, that: “Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech.” Freedom of speech includes the right: • Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag). West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943). • Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”). Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). • To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages. Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971). • To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976). • To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions). Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977). • To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest). Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990). Freedom of speech does not include the right: • To incite imminent lawless action. Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969). • To make or distribute obscene materials. Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957). • To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest. United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968). • To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration. Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988). • Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event. Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986). • Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event. Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007). Disclaimer: These resources are created by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts for use in educational activities only. They may not reflect the current state of the law, and are not intended to provide legal advice, guidance on litigation, or commentary on legislation. These days there is something they try to call “hate speech”. The UN says this after their definition. “However, to date there is no universal definition of hate speech under international human rights law. The concept is still under discussion, especially in relation to freedom of opinion and expression, non-discrimination and equality.” UN Even the UN can’t figure out what hate speech is. In the United States much of what falls under the category of "hate speech" is constitutionally protected. The United States does not have hate speech laws, since the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that laws criminalizing hate speech violate the guarantee to freedom of speech contained in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Yes, that pesky document that under pins all our laws. So, when you hear the term “hate speech”, know that most of that is just rhetoric. Also, when you hear that Facebook, Google, Twitter, YouTube, and Microsoft have joined other countries in their woke “hate speech” code of conduct that it is completely un-American. These companies exist because of this country. Their success is because they had the freedom that this country affords them. But ignoring the constitution is their choice. It’s really amazing that left-leaning idiots that run these businesses don’t want free speech. I guess that’s why Elon Musk bought Twitter. Maybe it will change. Those other left leaning companies prefer their own brand of censorship. I’m not sure who the arrogant Einstein is who thinks they know hate speech and they can best identify it. It’s like fact checking. Who is fact checking the fact checkers? I don’t like porn. I think it’s corrosive to society. But those that want to produce it and view it are welcome to rot their brains. Obviously, kids and others should be protected from it, and I think they are generally. This kind of freedom is protected by our constitution. So are those who wish to share their religious ideas with others. All this is free speech. There are those who don’t want this. There are those who don’t want negative ideas out there. There are those who don’t want any ideas or speech that goes against what they deem as good and correct. Many of these types are also into “wokeism”. They are also bent on being politically correct and not offending anyone. I do not want to offend anyone. I do not set out to do this. But I also know that what I say and how I say it sometimes may offend others. There are those who are soft and meek. This is not a bad thing, but it’s hard to exist in this world by being afraid and offended by everything, especially words. I do not advocate violent or vulgar speech. But I do talk plainly. It’s also important to know that there is evil in this world and that often it’s hard to fight against evil without violence. I know that the only real way to save this world is with love, understanding, and peace. The problem is that evil is not interested in love and peace. Evil often resorts to violence. More time than not, violence needs to be dealt with, with violence. It’s impossible to defend from violence without more violence. I know that is not Christ-like and it is no remedy. If good doesn’t commit violence to defend, then evil will take good out and there will be nothing left but evil. When I was thrust into a combat situation, we were defending ourselves. We never had the opportunity to go on the offensive. But later after we had left, the Army came in with the offensive to take out the enemy. What that violence did was stop the violence of the enemy. When I was a child, I learned a rhyme. “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” Words can be powerful, but they can hurt us as much as we allow them to. Free speech is extremely important. Being resilient against words intended to hurt is a sign of maturity and mental strength. We may not like the words that are used, but we should defend the right of those that use speech whether we agree with their expression or not. Hate speech is like assault weapon. It is a made-up phrase that is not defined. It means different things to different people. Free speech is defined. It is defined by the Constitution, and laws. We should do all we can to protect it and to strengthen it. Semper Paratus Check 6 Burn