| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
08 Oct 2004 09:06:44 PM |
| Object: |
Losing Liberty |
http://www.detnews.com/2003/editorial/0311/19/a10-328911.htm
Wednesday, November 19, 2003
Losing Liberty: First Amendment
Terror War Tests Commitment to Freedom of Speech
Bush administration undermines vital right to dissent
By The Detroit News
Every war tests America's commitment to its free speech ideals. The
war on terrorism is no different.
America has made tremendous strides in protecting the free speech
rights of citizens in the last century. The belief that an open
marketplace of ideas is the best venue for thrashing out political
differences and charting a national course on important issues is a
bedrock American principle.
Still, post-September 11, a disturbing tendency has emerged to use the
power of the government to stifle dissent.
Federal Appeals Judge Damon Keith, 80, of Detroit, sees the closed
court proceedings for terrorist suspects and deportees and the
snooping provisions of the Patriot Act as among the biggest threats to
free speech in his lifetime.
"People are afraid to dissent today," Keith says. "Dissent is an act
of faith in the democracy. Without dissent, the majority thinks
everything it is doing is right."
There are at least a dozen documented instances in which the Secret
Service has given preferential treatment to Bush administration
supporters -- while escorting its critics to so-called "protest zones"
where they can be neither seen nor heard.
The Bush administration maintains that concerns about security -- not
politics -- guide the Secret Service's treatment of activists. But if
security were the issue, then the agents should keep all members of
the public at bay -- not just opponents. What's to stop someone who
wants to hurt the president from sporting a pro-Bush sign to get
closer to him?
Further fueling suspicion about the Bush administration's motives is
the Justice Department's recent decision to revive a little-used law
to go after an anti-Bush activist in South Carolina.
The activist, Brett Bursey, who was carrying a sign "No War for Oil,"
was charged after he refused to move to a designated protest area
during the president's visit.
Bursey maintains that only he was asked to move to the site, about a
half a mile away, where the president could neither see him nor hear
him. Yet Bush supporters were allowed to stay much closer to the
speaker's podium.
"Bursey's prosecution," says Tim Lynch of the Cato Institute, "is a
case of blatant viewpoint discrimination that will be thrown out by
the courts."
Many lawmakers have written to the administration urging it to drop
the case, and it should do just that. There seems little point of the
prosecution except to send a signal to protesters that they exercise
their right to free speech at their own peril.
Democracy thrives on open debate and public dissent. Peaceful
expressions of support and protest are an important way citizens
communicate with their leaders -- and for leaders to gauge public
sentiment about their policies.
Quashing these expressions leaves a distorted view about what
Americans really think. It strikes at the heart of the democratic
process much in the same way that rigging the ballot box would.
America's founders embedded the right to free speech in the
Constitution for good reasons. Those reasons are still valid today.
Public officials in government and outside of it ought to nurture --
not curtail -- this right.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
