(1)The First Amendment, one of the corner stones in which America was founded. A mechanism which people can use to express themselves and their ideas. When used properly the first amendment is a powerful tool in the pursuit of the truth. When used improperly, it becomes a powerful tool in the spreading of lies and hateful, negative propaganda.
However, only those who don’t wish to have the truth told or don’t wish to have criminal information made public oppose its existence. Furthermore, the First Amendment, although broad in its scope is not a blank check to slander ones actions or reputation. One must accept sooner or later that inevitably something will be written or said one doesn’t like. But as with the justice system, even the worst of us are granted a fair trial, and sometimes the guilty go free. What is the alternative to all these freedoms? Repression. If we do not allow the criminal to have a fair trial, how can we expect one for ourselves?
The same is true for free speech, the moment we subject free speech to any restrictions beyond the borders of common sense and harmful speech; we give license to the government and others to label any speech, written or otherwise, a danger to national security according to their own definition. All in the name of the greater good. Granted, as I mentioned there are boundaries to free speech. But to use national security as an excuse to push a political agenda, to control the message of those who do not share in your ideology is dangerous to all.
Recently, a video was released to the public by a private party. This video is said to be so offensive to the ideologies of the Islamic faith it literally sparked killings and riots around the world.
This has led many to believe if we just censor such material it would somehow prevent further outbreaks. Their logic is flawed, because as they give over their freedom of free speech to the radicals in order to prevent further actions against them, one payment won’t be enough. The radicals will continue to ransom until there is nothing left. Then they would have complete control over what they (the radicals) allow us to write, say, and film about them. I believe this clearly falls under the U.S. policy that we will not negotiate with terrorists. The world needs to stand strong and understand what is really being asked. The topic of any restrictions to freedom of the press, religion, and speech is a slippery slope. It must be treaded with caution and wisdom. This article is in reference to the story posted on The Blaze.com, “Free speech that mocks Islam is a National Security Threat for U.S, prominent NJ Imam tells TheBlaze
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.