From the safety of the Sullivan decision, the New York Times casts doubt on the First Amendment rights of mere mortals.One of the misconceptions that muddle the West’s debate over Islam and free speech is the idea that people should be totally free to insult. Free speech is never that absolute. Even — or perhaps especially — in America, where citizens are protected by the First Amendment, there are certain words and opinions that no civilized person would utter, and others that open the speaker to civil charges.
Insult? I guess they didn't read Maureen Dowd's columns about Sarah Palin last fall.
Caribou Barbie?
Maybe what they mean is that you should not insult Islam?
Posts
3 comments:
st another example of the "Do What I Say, Not What I Do" mentality, aka "Oh, Well That's Different!".
It's the eternal playground battle between the kids who go crying to mommy and the kids who say "whatever, tool" and go about their business when insulted. Unfortunately, the criers are louder.
It's not an insult when the left do it. It's only an insult if the right replies or shows the left for the fools they are.
And I thought that journalist said the 1st Amendment was an obsolute...
WV: colkar
Is that like being cold-cocked?
Post a Comment