February 2, 2010
Bill Of Wrongs and The First Amendment
I picked up a book the other day titled “Bill of Wrongs – The Executive Branch’s Assault on America’s Fundamental Rights” and written by Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose. While it was the title that grabbed my attention, it was the excerpt on the back of the book that made me buy it:
“To all the daring, courageous,
or just plain stubborn ‘ordinary’
Americans who have ever gotten up
on their hind legs and said,
‘Well, that’s not right, that’s not fair’:
This book is dedicated to you.”
Well that sure sounds like me in a nutshell. I haven’t gotten very far into it yet but what I’ve read is basically about how the First Amendment is ignored when the President or certain other members of government are involved. The loss of these rights is explained away as measures for security but clearly some of the instances in which Americans rights are stomped on are less for security and more for show.
For years I have noticed the slow destruction of our rights as Americans and/or human beings. For example, in my state it is against the law to not wear a seat-belt when driving or riding in a motor vehicle. Now I agree that people should wear seat-belts and I do wear my seat-belt – not because it is law but because it is the smart thing to do. I also agree with laws that keep children safe with car-seats and seat-belts. But wearing a seat-belt should be a personal choice, not a law. Not wearing a seat-belt causes harm to no one but the person who isn’t wearing one. I can’t think of one decent justification for making this a law except that fining people who break it raises money for the city. I don’t think that reason is good enough.
And that is when my critical eye turned toward the “rights” of the people and the laws being passed to eliminate them.
The First Amendment promises that “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.” Basically, we have freedom to practice any religion we want, say and write what we want, gather in a peaceful way to voice our opinions, and ask the Government to fix a problem or right a wrong.
In the book, Bill of Wrongs, I learned that, at every Presidential appearance, the government has the right to designate a certain “free-speech zone” where all protesters are required by law to remain during the President’s appearance. Secret Service usually (if not always) takes advantage of this right and instructs local law enforcement to direct anyone chanting, wearing or displaying in any way anything that might be considered “anti-” the President to a separate area. This is supposedlya security measure but I fail to see how a T-shirt or banner could be used as a weapon against the President…unless the media picking up a negative opinion of the President or his ideas is considered physically dangerous.
You would probably be surprised to learn how many people have been arrested simply for wanting to go to a Presidential event and wear clothing or carry signs expressing an opinion. Of course they are usually not arrested until they refuse to move to and stand within the “free-speech” area which is always out of sight of the President. These charges take up the courts’ time and uses up valuable taxpayer money trying to make them stick when they are clearly (to me at least) unconstitutional.
After all isn’t that one of the founding principles of our country? The right to disagree with our government? And don’t we have the right to express that disagreement right in front of him? Obviously not.
What ever happened to “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”? What does it say about our country when our leader, our President, refuses to follow one of the primary rights of our nation’s Constitution?
