re: .

quote:

---

Yes, we have free speech. The problem is that most Americans have a gross misunderstanding of what free speech entails.

---

There's your answer. End of thread.

Saying something publicly that embarasses your employer and getting reprimanded has nothing to do with violating free speech.

Free speech doesn't mean you can say whatever you want and not suffer any consenquence. If you believe that, you're a fricking moron.

You can get upset about it, but the First Amendment does not guarantee you an equal soapbox to stand on and shout your speech. shite, it doesn't even guarantee you a soapbox at all. It sure as hell doesn't guarantee you the use of the public's soapbox.

There is a line of demarcation between regualting the content of speech and regulating the delivery of that speech.

quote:

---

The freedom of speech does not guarantee one the right to use the airwaves to broadcast that speech.

---

please tell me how we have made a special consideration for "public airwaves", the fairness doctrine has already been scrapped, their vague indecency policies ruled unconstitutional. Yeah, the 1st amendment doesn't specify airwaves nor does it specify any place or medium...because the intent is crystal clear...government cannot abridge speech. where and how is irrelevant.

quote:

---

It's a similar to the fact that screaming fire on a street corner is perfectly fine, but doing so in a movie theatre is not

---

this is irrelevant, you cannot harm others with your speech. Yelling "fire" in a movie theater poses a hazard to the physical well being of others. a broadcaster yelling "count" on meet the press doesn't. a broadcaster talking about the reach around he got the night before doesn't. They issue punishment on vague and incomprehensible ideas of "indecency" morality is subjective, but hey the government should make it a definitive iron clad set of standards and then push that on the rest of us at the point of a gun. And it isn't just the person making such speech, they are restricting our CHOICE to decide what we want to watch and listen.

quote:

---

. Certain speech is regulated in certain areas and certain media.

---

yes, and this is a complete violation of the basic idea of free speech and the 1st amendment of the united states constitution

quote:

---

That doesn't mean you are forbidden from saying those things, I have the right to say the word "frick" but can suffer repercussions for doing so in certain circumstances.

---

yeah, that's so great. So in North Korea they have the right to say that Kim Jong Un is a fat disgusting slob, but can suffer repercussions for doing so in certain circumstances. It's free when no one hears it, sees it, etc.

quote:

---

This idea that freedom of speech s absolute freedom to do whatever you want wherever you want is just incorrect.

---

it is an absolute freedom to say what you want, wherever you want without consequences from the government. Again, we're talking about a government organization restricting speech in the public space, the one place they absolutely shouldn't.

the intent of the first amendment isn't to run to a safe and private establishment to voice your ideas...it is everywhere, now private consequences...no problem. That is the private owner of such a place employing his basic rights

quote:

---

regulating interstate and foreign commerce in communication by wire and radio so as to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States a rapid, efficient, nationwide, and worldwide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges, for the purpose of the national defense, and for the purpose of securing a more effective execution of this policy by centralizing authority theretofore granted by law to several agencies and by granting additional authority with respect to interstate and foreign commerce in wire and radio communication, there is hereby created a commission to be known as the 'Federal Communications Commission'

---

There's your constitutional foundation. Gotta love that Commerce CLause, baby!

LINK

"All or nothing" is fool's gold. Reminds me of the admonition: " Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

Glad I could contribute.

quote:

---

All or nothing" is fool's gold.

---

except when you're discussing the MOST BASIC of human rights.

sure

There is no gray area here. Government cannot limit speech, The FCC was created to do precisely that. If you're a liberal, then I applaud you for being philosophically consistent, for the rest... liberty, freedom, oh yeah except for the following.

quote:

---

You have an inherent misunderstanding

---

just respond to the points or I'm not interested. You laid out your reasons, and then didn't really think beyond that point to be able to defend them. You support an admin law body restricting our speech and believe that having a such an entity doesn't violate a law that reads:


Congress 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.

...got it.

you also have an inherent misunderstanding of how FDR delivered his "new deal" to the American people and what that new deal actually entailed.

sick burn, again


congress shall make no law...NO LAW



abridging the freedom of speech...get a dictionary for that one, you seem to not understand it

then "oh well it is ok for them to make A law abridging the freedom of speech because

airwaves
not a blanket right
and on and on and on

it is so precise and deliberate. Laws today are about the size of a novel, and yet they made it one sentence...but I guess they were just fricking stupid huh?

quote:

---

Government cannot limit speech, The FCC was created to do precisely that.

---

The FCC does not limit speech. They limit words. Coitus and F**k mean the same thing. Yet one is deemed unacceptable, one is not. The FCC is not denying anyone from "expressing" the idea of sexual intercourse, only the words used to describe the idea.

Now, if the FCC were to deny any religious programming or deny some atheist programming because of beliefs, then the government would be limiting free speech(expression of ideas).

To my knowledge, the FCC does not limit anyone from expressing their ideas. They HAVE tried to squelch the amount of conservative radio in the past. Stating that stations have to give equal time to opposing views.