Comments on: From The Archives -- Fred Phelps' Hatemongering And The First Amendment http://www.chrisweigant.com/2011/03/03/from-the-archives-fred-phelps-hatemongering-and-the-first-amendment/ Reality-based political commentary Wed, 06 May 2026 16:52:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Michale http://www.chrisweigant.com/2011/03/03/from-the-archives-fred-phelps-hatemongering-and-the-first-amendment/#comment-13307 Michale Fri, 04 Mar 2011 14:08:46 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=3579#comment-13307 As I said when this first ran, I like the idea of there being consequences for any exercise of Freedom Of Speech.. In this regard, I think the SCOTUS dropped the ball in their ruling.. They could have affirmed that Free Speech DOES cover this scumbags rantings, but could also have established that those who exercise their Free Speech are responsible for the consequences of that Free Speech... <B>"With great power, comes great responsibility"</B> -Spiderman In other words, if you exercise your freedom of speech, then you are responsible for the aftermath... Michale..... As I said when this first ran, I like the idea of there being consequences for any exercise of Freedom Of Speech..

In this regard, I think the SCOTUS dropped the ball in their ruling..

They could have affirmed that Free Speech DOES cover this scumbags rantings, but could also have established that those who exercise their Free Speech are responsible for the consequences of that Free Speech...

"With great power, comes great responsibility"
-Spiderman

In other words, if you exercise your freedom of speech, then you are responsible for the aftermath...

Michale.....

]]> By: dsws http://www.chrisweigant.com/2011/03/03/from-the-archives-fred-phelps-hatemongering-and-the-first-amendment/#comment-13301 dsws Fri, 04 Mar 2011 04:26:29 +0000 http://www.chrisweigant.com/?p=3579#comment-13301 The real protection for unpopular speech is that it can't do anything. In Libya, criticizing Qaddafi threatened to turn the whole order of society upside down, with all the attendant death and destruction. So it would get people disappeared and tortured. Here, you can say just about anything, and your words will echo in the wells of silence. The media won't cover it. The only people who hear it, or see the signs, will be the others at the rally: you won't change their minds because they already agree with you. Or if you publicize it well enough, you might get some counter-protesters. You won't change any of their minds either. So unless you plumb new depths of depravity as Phelps does, you won't even get the proverbial fifteen minutes of fame. Even if you do drum up a following, all you can do is set back your cause by drawing some votes away from the party you disagree with less, and maybe rile up some people to turn out and vote for the party you disagree with more. So the impetus to actually suppress such speech will be correspondingly weak. The real protection for unpopular speech is that it can't do anything. In Libya, criticizing Qaddafi threatened to turn the whole order of society upside down, with all the attendant death and destruction. So it would get people disappeared and tortured.

Here, you can say just about anything, and your words will echo in the wells of silence. The media won't cover it. The only people who hear it, or see the signs, will be the others at the rally: you won't change their minds because they already agree with you. Or if you publicize it well enough, you might get some counter-protesters. You won't change any of their minds either. So unless you plumb new depths of depravity as Phelps does, you won't even get the proverbial fifteen minutes of fame. Even if you do drum up a following, all you can do is set back your cause by drawing some votes away from the party you disagree with less, and maybe rile up some people to turn out and vote for the party you disagree with more. So the impetus to actually suppress such speech will be correspondingly weak.

]]>