Here I am again, back blogging after a two-month sabbatical. This caught my eye and is getting the juices flowing again.
The American Society of Newspaper editors today issued a statement
deploring attempts by government leaders to demonize newspapers for
fulfilling their Constitutional role.
Posted by cmatthews at June 30, 2006 04:07 PM
Comments
I support the First Amendment of the Constitution completely. However that does not give anyone the right to jeopardize the health and safety of others under the guidelines of "Free Speech."
"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."
If you read the amendment very closely and interpret it literally, the only right we have to free speech is to be able to petition the government for a redress of grievance. This can be either through speech, the press or a peaceful assembly.
It does not give the press, any speaker or assembly of persons the right to do and say anything they please or the right for someone to attack, fabricate half truths, embarrass or castigate any private citizen for any reason what so ever.
Nor does it give anyone the right to jeopardize the health and safety of others by exposing specific technological procedures the government uses to maintain our health and safety, something they specifically are chartered to do under the constitution.
In point of fact it doesn't really address citizens all that much in that it specifically addresses what the government cannot do.
Under this line of thought all of us are responsible for what we say and can be held accountable for what we say either through legal action or, regretfully, a punch in the nose if necessary.
I say this because in certain circumstances, because of some of the inflammatory, personal and libelous attacks I have read and seen could legally provoke such an action as people take personal insults seriously and, if allowed to continue unfettered, will resort to physical altercation as their remedy.
Our courts have upheld many cases where a punch in the nose was allowed as a result of continuous provocation. Apparently the courts understand that if pushed, such emotional outbursts to such continuous provocation are excusable.
Think of it this way. Should I accuse you publicly of being an unsavory type of woman, no doubt your husband would punch me in the nose in defense of your honor. And he would be justified in doing so because I do not have license to say anything I please.
Granted there really isn't much that can be done to unscrupulous media personnel who are more interested in making that big scoop to get a name for them than they are about the health and safety of others. But they should be required, under the guidelines of maintaining security, to divulge the names of the people who illegally divulged critical and classified information. Those people, the people who leaked the information, then should be prosecuted under the full extent of the law if for no other reason than they have jeopardized the health and safety of every American.
Dave Hardesty
