Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment

[Bruce Balden]

>The first amendment is about what government can't do to you, not what your
>neighbor can or can't do.
>
>
And whether the constitution so narrowly construed limits the action of
local councils. It would be extremely convenient if each fo the 50 states
adopted by custom each of the federal amendements mutatis mutandis.


However, freedom of expression in the US and elsewhere is mostly a limited,
but useful fiction.

While many have doubts about where strict freedom of speach should exist,
evidence is that is exists so long as the EFFECT of abberrent speech isn't
too disruptive to the established economic order.  So, for instance, using
the first amendment to tolerate pornographic works and such is against the
putative moral code of most Americans ca. 1950, but tolerating it didn't
really threaten any of the power elite.

Similarly, when the Civil Rights Act gave aggressive enforcement powers for
rights already guaranteed by the consitution, this meant that the power
elite was finally moved to act by massive pressure. Although social
conditioning may have taught southern white businessmen to look down on
negros, they knew that the negro economic power even at the time was very
significant.

America (and Canada, where this is been written from) are physically large
enough to have physically separated and opposed elite from different regions
who duke it out in Congress/Parliament.

So if you want the right to use strong encryption, or don't want CDA II to
ruin your life, appealing to the Constitution is not what I recommend.  If
people dislike porn enough, they'll **amend the constitution** if that's
what it takes.

>
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>      David Honig                   Orbit Technology
>     honig at otc.net                  Intaanetto Jigyoubu
>
> M-16 : Don Quixote :: PGP : Louis Freeh
>         Let freedom ring (or screech at 28.8)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>