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.

It's the first thing you see when you get on totse. What does it mean to you. I think that people will still create even if it is outlawed however it won't be shared as freely. Totse what do you think of the 1st amendent? does it allow people to express themselves or does it give citizens a false sense of creativity and freedom?

The 1st amendment is great. I see why you are saying that it "gives a false sense of security" but you are also fogetting that there are other amendments/laws out there and this is why the peoples first amendment rights get suppressed sometimes.

The first amendment is not the only law of the land (American land that is).

That being said the first amendment as well as the rest of the bill of rights are incredilbly awesome and essential part of America, in an essence they are America. I also strongly believe that out rights are still upheld and I can personally attest to this (violation of my 4th amendment right was violated and resulted in criminal charges agianst me being dropped), and I think it is a very long way off that they ever become surpressed.

AMERICA!

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.

It's the first thing you see when you get on totse. What does it mean to you. I think that people will still create even if it is outlawed however it won't be shared as freely. Totse what do you think of the 1st amendent? does it allow people to express themselves or does it give citizens a false sense of creativity and freedom?

I think the First Amendment sucks. It should be illegal to use a period instead of a question mark when you ask a question. It should also be illegal to not capitalize the first letter of a sentence, unless some obscure grammatical rule prevents you from doing so.

Then again, you're a noobie. I'll survive.

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=970266

How long before the thought police are in your country?

The bill of rights is awesome. Europeans and canadians incarcerated for " hate speech" and holocaust denial and criticism of islam can look at our free speech and weep. As long as your free speech doesn't put someone in danger(military secrets and yelling " fire" in a crowded theater), you're pretty well protected.

there should be more free speech in school. i mean, i'm not racist, for example, but i think that if someone who is racist expresses his views in a neutral manner in a classroom setting, he shouldn't be expelled for that. I mean, that's bullshit. If I want to wear a swastika to school, or a shirt that discriminates against religion or sexuality or gender or whatever, i fucking should be able to! that's what america is supposed to be about! they teach us in school, "stand up for what you believe in, even if you're the only one doing it!" but they'll soon as say that than throw you into the principal's office for expressing views not condoned by them.

To paraphrase Abbie Hoffman, "Free speech is the ability to shout "Theatre!" in a crowded fire."

The bill of rights is only a piece of paper. If you want it to mean a damn thing then you have to fight for it just as its creators did. That means the next time you kids are in school and somebody gets expelled for wearing a swastika you have to make some fucking noise.

The bill of rights is only a piece of paper. If you want it to mean a damn thing then you have to fight for it just as its creators did. That means the next time you kids are in school and somebody gets expelled for wearing a swastika you have to make some fucking noise.

Omg, I'm pretty sure these cases go to local school boards, NOT the congress of the United States, lol. The first amendment only has to do with the Federal gov't, nothing else. Civics class much?

The only school case that I can even think of that got up to a really high fed level was the "Bong hits 4 Jesus" situation, but that was only for the SC to side/disagree with the local school board.

Omg, I'm pretty sure these cases go to local school boards, NOT the congress of the United States, lol. The first amendment only has to do with the Federal gov't, nothing else. Civics class much?

The only school case that I can even think of that got up to a really high fed level was the "Bong hits 4 Jesus" situation, but that was only for the SC to side/disagree with the local school board.

Who in the fuck said anything about congress or the federal government? Sober up before posting next time.

Who in the fuck said anything about congress or the federal government? Sober up before posting next time.

OP:


Thoughts on the 1st Amendment
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.



Please turn in your badge and clean out your desk.

Then why quote me and not the OP?

As long as your free speech doesn't put someone in danger(military secrets and yelling " fire" in a crowded theater), you're pretty well protected.

But that's technically abridging the freedom of speech, isn't it?

My understanding is that the courts have ruled that so-called "prior restraint" is forbidden.
Ie, that you are only allowed to punish the 'bad person' /after/ they say whatever.
At which you get them with inciting riot/reckless endangerment/sedition

Tangentially... philosophically, the amendments support preexisting rights. Given to us by our creator(s), inherent in mankind, whatever... not an important distinction.
The point is that the right to state one's opinion does not cease to exist when the powers that be find that undesirable - the right is merely infringed.

And so it is proper to complain when the school board - or any ruling authority - infringes those rights.

Omg, I'm pretty sure these cases go to local school boards, NOT the congress of the United States, lol. The first amendment only has to do with the Federal gov't, nothing else. Civics class much?

The only school case that I can even think of that got up to a really high fed level was the "Bong hits 4 Jesus" situation, but that was only for the SC to side/disagree with the local school board.

The First Amendment applies against the states and state agencies, such as local school boards, through a judicial doctrine known as the doctrine of incorporation. Now, in the case of school boards, they have a bit more leeway, because 1: The rights of minors are curtailed until they reach adulthood and 2: The schools have a judicially recognised mission as centres of education to which the First Amendment sometimes takes a back seat in order to allow them to promote a constructive and ordered learning environment.

But that's technically abridging the freedom of speech, isn't it?

Technically yes.

Technically yes.

So that makes it unconstitutional.

And if the Constitution is violated like that, is it worth anything at all?

"and if the constitution is violated like that, is it worth anything at all?"

Yes.
It allows you to know when a certain set of traditional rights have been violated, thus helping to prevent [right creep].

It is still up to the populace to complain about that violation, though.

Free speech is limited on campus to protect against speech that will supposedly "incite violence."

So that makes it unconstitutional.

And if the Constitution is violated like that, is it worth anything at all?

Only if you have the balls to do something about it.

As long as your free speech doesn't put someone in danger(military secrets and yelling " fire" in a crowded theater), you're pretty well protected.

The "fire in a crowded theater" saying is really stupid. First of all, it comes from the case Schenck v. United States, in which I believe the Supreme Court unanimously decided that it was illegal to speak out against the draft. If that isn't a horrible offense to democratic ideals, I don't know what is. Secondly, even if someone yelled fire in a crowded theater, I think it's unlikely that people would evacuate in the first place if it was clear that there was no fire and even if they did, they probably will not stampede and trample people to death. People are often more civilized than others give them credit for.

freedom of speech is a fucking facade. look at all the censorship this country has. u cant say anything offensive on the radio/tv unless u pay the gov't. u can get in trouble for saying shit about the gov't. u can get in trouble for saying shit out in the street technically, for disturbing the peace or domestic disturbance or just "offensive language".

the gov't has infringed upon this right since john adams was in office and it will only continue. apparantly we only have freedom of speech if we give the gov't money to enforce its bullshit laws against us.

as for schools, technically, what they do is "constitutionally legal" as reclaimpublicspace put it before, to stop violence, but also because of some bullshit law/loophole that they are able to do it. my history teacher explained it but i forgot what he said.

the gov't has actually thought about passing laws to regulate the internet, like in china. anything slanderous or bad said about the gov't, and that person can be punished, but that will hopefully never happen.

freedom of speech is a fucking facade. look at all the censorship this country has. u cant say anything offensive on the radio/tv unless u pay the gov't. u can get in trouble for saying shit about the gov't. u can get in trouble for saying shit out in the street technically, for disturbing the peace or domestic disturbance or just "offensive language".

the gov't has infringed upon this right since john adams was in office and it will only continue. apparantly we only have freedom of speech if we give the gov't money to enforce its bullshit laws against us.

as for schools, technically, what they do is "constitutionally legal" as reclaimpublicspace put it before, to stop violence, but also because of some bullshit law/loophole that they are able to do it. my history teacher explained it but i forgot what he said.

the gov't has actually thought about passing laws to regulate the internet, like in china. anything slanderous or bad said about the gov't, and that person can be punished, but that will hopefully never happen.

this, and freedom of religion is completely overlooked in the area of sacraments. i.e., the use of cannabis, "magic" mushrooms, lsd, etc. in religious ceremonies or for spiritual purpopses