STILLWELL: When Speech Becomes a Crime

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 6/28/6 | Cinnamon Stillwell

[thulldud]

A story published here yesterday indicates that DC now has the highest incidence of HIV/AIDS in the nation.

And when Congress recesses, the average IQ of DC goes up 15 points.

[oh8eleven]

Thank you.

[Wallace T.]

The Washington Metro transit board and Cal Poly are not part of the private sector, but are government entities. It would seem that First Amendment protections should apply in these institutions. As for the legal problems of Oriana Fallaci and David Irving, they occurred in Italy and Austria, respectively. Continental European nations have never recognized a broadly interpreted right to free speech in the sense the United States has. Not even Britain and the Commonwealth countries enjoy the level of freedom we have in this area, as evidenced by "hate speech" laws on the books in Britain and Canada.

[freedumb2003]

Show me where and/or how the 1st Amendment stops at the doorways of private institutions.

The USC is a contract between individuals and the Government. The only entities recognized by the USC are individuals, the Federal Government and the States.

The management of businesses is left to the (late and lamented) 10th Amendment.

One person, acting as an individual, cannot "censor" another, per se.

[piytar]

In contrast, the libs think that disclosing operational details of a top secret anti-terror program is "free speach," despite an utter lack of free speach grounds (i.e., corruption, illegality, etc.) to justify such disclosure.

Liberalism really is a mental disorder, isn't it?

[freedumb2003]

The Washington Metro transit board and Cal Poly are not part of the private sector, but are government entities.

Within the confines of the job, they can indeed censor. When I worked for the State of California, we were given directives at election time that we could NOT have any political banners, buttons, etc. on our person or cubicle walls, since this would be viewed as an endorsement.

They couldn't censor me outside of the workplace but they had to do so to ensure impartiality (the converse of the issue at hand).

[freedumb2003]

In contrast, the libs think that disclosing operational details of a top secret anti-terror program is "free speach,"

But the so-called "outing" of Valerie Plame OTOH was an awful breach of National Security.

Hypocrites, the lot of 'em.

[piytar]

The USC is a contract between individuals and the Government. The only entities recognized by the USC are individuals, the Federal Government and the States and state actors who act on their behalf. Those state actors include entities such as public schools and universities (it's actually a little more complex than that in some cases).

[razorback-bert]

Vice President for Student Affairs Cornel Morton called attention to Hinkle's blond hair and blue eyes and the fact that Hinkle was a white male member of the Republican club. Morton said that to students of color, this could represent "a collision of experience." The chemistry of the situation has racial implications, Morton said, and Hinkle was naïve not to acknowledge this.

Somehow, I doubt if the situation was reversed that there would be any stink.

[soccermom]

Canada is getting really bad. There, people really are fined by the government for saying things against homosexuality. The Knights of Columbus was fined for declining to allow their social hall to be used for a gay wedding! It is really chilling what they do in Canada. A lady called into Bill O'Reilly's show yesterday stating that free speech in Canda was limited and he just discounted her out-of-hand. I can't believe he isn't aware of what is going on up there. Heck, isn't his show banned up there?

[soccermom]

Canada is getting really bad. There, people really are fined by the government for saying things against homosexuality. The Knights of Columbus was fined for declining to allow their social hall to be used for a gay wedding! It is really chilling what they do in Canada. A lady called into Bill O'Reilly's show yesterday stating that free speech in Canda was limited and he just discounted her out-of-hand. I can't believe he isn't aware of what is going on up there. Heck, isn't his show banned up there?

[Adder]

"When I worked for the State of California, we were given directives at election time that we could NOT have any political banners, buttons, etc. on our person or cubicle walls, since this would be viewed as an endorsement."

But is it LEGAL to make those rules? Not the fact that it was done...bureaucracy will push to see what it can get away with and if it works they go for more restrictions and so on. And speech is curtailed all the time in the interest of "fairness" or "impartiality" or whatever thin veil they want to use.
But does that make it right or do we just resign ourselves to it?

[oh8eleven]

The management of businesses is left to the (late and lamented) 10th Amendment.
The 10th Amendment (p)reserves states rights. Nowhere do I see it nullifying the 1st Amendment - or managing businesses.

[Steve_Seattle]

As originally written, the 1st Amendment places restrictions only on the federal government ("Congress") with regards to curtailing freedom of the press, freedom pf religion, etc.

In modern times, since the passage of the 14th Amendment, it is been interpreted as also applying to state and local governments, hence the endless battles regarding nativity scenes and high school commencement speeches. (I think applying the 1st Amendment to state and local governments completely subverts the original intent of the amendment, which was to keep the federal government OUT of local affairs, not to give federal courts the power to micromanage local affairs such as high school commencement speeches.)

Despite all this, few if any courts would say that the 1st Amendment as such applies to actions by private individuals or businesses. Nonetheless, myriad anti-discrimination laws, both federal and local, often create that impression.

[freedumb2003]

The 10th Amendment (p)reserves states rights. Nowhere do I see it nullifying the 1st Amendment - or managing businesses.

You need to take a course on the USC. The 10th Amendment handles everthing not enumerated in the USC (or at least it used to). It is the most important Amendment we have (or had).

It says that the creation of and management of business or anything else is left to the States or the People.

And as has been pointed out to you, the first part of the 1st Amendment says "Congress shall pass no law..."

Businesses simply do not exist in the USC. Thus, the 10th.

[monocle]

Read the First Amendment. As someone once said it is better to remain silent and thought to be ignorant than to confirm your ignorance by speaking.

[Carry_Okie]

There is a distinction between speech codes in public versus private employ: The latter has the right to dismiss as a right pertaining to private property; the former does not.

[oh8eleven]

Well thanks - and fu too.

[steve-b]

What do the above examples have in common?

Not much, really.

Two of them (Fallaci and Irving) are examples of the abuse of government power.

One of them (Smith) is an example of the termination of an employment contract in accordance with the legitimate rights of the employer.

One of them (Hinkle) is an example of a breach of contract.

[Wallace T.]

The difficulty with free speech in the public sector dates back to the spoils system prevalent in 19th Century America. Under the spoils system, a government employee's tenure in a job was dependent upon his willingness to campaign for the party in power or his family and social connections with politicians. The advent of civil service reform in the 1880s and thereafter was a response to the widespread corruption among civil servants, including the police. By requiring written or physical tests and prohibiting campaigning for public office holders, the intent was to create a group of peace officers and civil servants that would impartially enforce the law. No system is perfect and many urban political machines circumvented civil service rules, especially in the area of promotions. However, the goal was and is to separate civil servants from partisan politics. It was not to impose an immoral viewpoint on homosexuality on an individual or restrict support for a conservative speaker and his ideas.

The RINO governor of Maryland and the red diaper doper babies running Cal Poly are merely using their political clout to punish people who hold to traditional or conservative views.