[dead]

I don't see what is so important about having a right to anonymous speech. I hardly think our founding fathers would have had any regard for such a right, or any expectation that the first amendment would be interpreted to protect those not manly enough to expose their identity.

James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay would strongly disagree with you.

They recognized their right to anonymous free speech when the originally published the Federalist Papers in that manner.

The Supreme Court has ruled that protecting anonymous speech has the same purpose as the First Amendment itself: to "protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ­and their ideas from suppression."

[Steve Eisenberg]

James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay would strongly disagree with you.

They recognized their right to anonymous free speech when the originally published the Federalist Papers in that manner.

I thought someone might bring that up. Pen names were popular in the eighteenth century, but the motives of those who adopted them were far from those of a Klansman wearing a mask in order to conceal his identity out of fear of letting his neighbors know who he is. One of the main reasons pen names were used in the eighteenth century was humility.

The Supreme Court has ruled that protecting anonymous speech has the same purpose as the First Amendment itself: to "protect unpopular individuals from retaliation ­and their ideas from suppression."

The truth is, anonymous ideas which stay anonymous will go nowhere, just as surely as if they had been suppressed, despite all the legalistic protection in the world.

(This of course implies no criticism of use of pen names on FR, which is close in spirit to the use by Madison et. al.)