Mike Irwin
March 26, 2003, 02:54 PM
In response to this flight of absolute fantasy...
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/114243_robert26.shtml
Editor:
Robert Jamieson’s column, Shifting Rules of War – at Home and Abroad, decries the Seattle Police’s arbitrary enforcement of laws that may restrict freedom of expression of those protesting military action in Iraq.
But Mr. Jamieson shows his abysmal lack Constitutional knowledge when he goes one step farther and says that “regular folk” are also apparently violating protestors’ rights to free speech. As an example, he cites Michael Moore getting a “public slap down,” and even being blacklisted by a New York tabloid.
Unfortunately Mr. Jamieson’s claim is a leap into the absurd and in doing so he comes perilously close to becoming what he claims to abhor.
The First Amendment to the Constitution protects citizens’ rights by limiting the Government’s ability to pass laws that restrict free speech.
Unless ordinary citizens – those of us who are offended by, and are protesting the likes of, Michael Moore, the Dixie Chicks, etc. – have suddenly been elevated to governmental status, no violation of free speech exists, nor can one even be claimed.
We who are offended by Mr. Moore (et. al.) are not attempting to muzzle his right to express his contrarian views – we’re exercising our right to say “We don’t agree with you.” In essence, just because you have the right to say what you want does not guarantee acceptance of your views.
So, in the coming weeks, as I and others choose not to purchase movies, music, books, etc., by those whose views we reject, we do so knowing full well that we are exercising our rights to free speech, NOT trampling the rights of others.
Mr. Jamieson enjoys the protections offered by the First Amendment, so it would be nice if he were to show it a minimum amount of respect for it by understanding its application.
Sincerely,
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/114243_robert26.shtml
Editor:
Robert Jamieson’s column, Shifting Rules of War – at Home and Abroad, decries the Seattle Police’s arbitrary enforcement of laws that may restrict freedom of expression of those protesting military action in Iraq.
But Mr. Jamieson shows his abysmal lack Constitutional knowledge when he goes one step farther and says that “regular folk” are also apparently violating protestors’ rights to free speech. As an example, he cites Michael Moore getting a “public slap down,” and even being blacklisted by a New York tabloid.
Unfortunately Mr. Jamieson’s claim is a leap into the absurd and in doing so he comes perilously close to becoming what he claims to abhor.
The First Amendment to the Constitution protects citizens’ rights by limiting the Government’s ability to pass laws that restrict free speech.
Unless ordinary citizens – those of us who are offended by, and are protesting the likes of, Michael Moore, the Dixie Chicks, etc. – have suddenly been elevated to governmental status, no violation of free speech exists, nor can one even be claimed.
We who are offended by Mr. Moore (et. al.) are not attempting to muzzle his right to express his contrarian views – we’re exercising our right to say “We don’t agree with you.” In essence, just because you have the right to say what you want does not guarantee acceptance of your views.
So, in the coming weeks, as I and others choose not to purchase movies, music, books, etc., by those whose views we reject, we do so knowing full well that we are exercising our rights to free speech, NOT trampling the rights of others.
Mr. Jamieson enjoys the protections offered by the First Amendment, so it would be nice if he were to show it a minimum amount of respect for it by understanding its application.
Sincerely,
