22,600,330 members doing good!
share your passions, stories, inspirations, and more
Jun 27, 2010

The United States Supreme Court issued a ruling on June 23, 2010, that allows Congress to restrict free speech for Americans. The Supreme Court justices are appointed as guardians of the Constitution, which provides that Congress shall make no law limiting free speech and press, the right to peaceful assembly, and free exercise of religion. Another assault on the First Amendment occurred on June 27, 2010. The 111th Congress voted to give the president's office the right to shut down the Internet in America - for security, of course. Below is a historic speech by a freedom fighter of another time, Frederick Douglass. His "Plea for Free Speech" addresses the importance of freedom of expression, another right that is being taken from Americans, supposedly to save us from terrorism. I have been censored for years to prevent my advocacy to decriminalize mental illness in America and expose The Cochran Firm fraud on minority citizens nationwide. Today, I discovered that my PC is not allowed to use WiFi services at McDonald's restaurants. My PCs are illegally put on a workgroup domain over which I am not the administrator. Then persons who censor my advocacy for equal justice and human rights exercise control over my Internet input. I use the Internet away from home because I experience more interference when working online at home, where my PC is illegally controlled by remote access. See videos of my real-time cyber censorship at my YouTube channel - jkempp703, and read more about censorship to prevent my advocacy to help the least of these, His brethren, throughout my Care2 sharebook and at my blog (see the links below). I pray that you never have to endure assaults on your freedom of expression like I do.  I believe government restrictions on the right to communicate freely negate the democratic process and such restrictions are a prelude to outright slavery.

A Plea for Free Speech

by Frederick Douglass
(1817?-1895)


Boston is a great city - and Music Hall has a fame almost as extensive as that of Boston. Nowhere more than here have the principles of human freedom been expounded. But for the circumstances already mentioned, it would seem almost presumption for me to say anything here about those principles. And yet, even here, in Boston, the moral atmosphere is dark and heavy. The principles of human liberty, even I correctly apprehended, find but limited support in this hour a trial. The world moves slowly, and Boston is much like the world. We thought the principle of free speech was an accomplished fact. Here, if nowhere else, we thought the right of the people to assemble and to express their opinion was secure. Dr. Channing had defended the right, Mr. Garrison had practically asserted the right, and Theodore Parker had maintained it with steadiness and fidelity to the last.

But here we are to-day contending for what we thought we gained years ago. The mortifying and disgraceful fact stares us in the face, that though Faneuil Hall and Bunker Hill Monument stand, freedom of speech is struck down. No lengthy detail of facts is needed. They are already notorious; far more so than will be wished ten years hence.

 The world knows that last Monday a meeting assembled to discuss the question: "How Shall Slavery Be Abolished?" The world also knows that that meeting was invaded, insulted, captured by a mob of gentlemen, and thereafter broken up and dispersed by the order of the mayor, who refused to protect it, though called upon to do so. If this had been a mere outbreak of passion and prejudice among the baser sort, maddened by rum and hounded on by some wily politician to serve some immediate purpose, - a mere exceptional affair, - it might be allowed to rest with what has already been said. But the leaders of the mob were gentlemen. They were men who pride themselves upon their respect for law and order.

These gentlemen brought their respect for the law with them and proclaimed it loudly while in the very act of breaking the law. Theirs was the law of slavery. The law of free speech and the law for the protection of public meetings they trampled under foot, while they greatly magnified the law of slavery.

The scene was an instructive one. Men seldom see such a blending of the gentleman with the rowdy, as was shown on that occasion. It proved that human nature is very much the same, whether in tarpaulin or broadcloth. Nevertheless, when gentlemen approach us in the character of lawless and abandoned loafers, - assuming for the moment their manners and tempers, - they have themselves to blame if they are estimated below their quality.

No right was deemed by the fathers of the Government more sacred than the right of speech. It was in their eyes, as in the eyes of all thoughtful men, the great moral renovator of society and government. Daniel Webster called it a homebred right, a fireside privilege. Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one's thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down. They know its power. Thrones, dominions, principalities, and powers, founded in injustice and wrong, are sure to tremble, if men are allowed to reason of righteousness, temperance, and of a judgment to come in their presence. Slavery cannot tolerate free speech. Five years of its exercise would banish the auction block and break every chain in the South. They will have none of it there, for they have the power. But shall it be so here?

Even here in Boston, and among the friends of freedom, we hear two voices: one denouncing the mob that broke up our meeting on Monday as a base and cowardly outrage; and another, deprecating and regretting the holding of such a meeting, by such men, at such a time. We are told that the meeting was ill-timed, and the parties to it unwise.

Why, what is the matter with us? Are we going to palliate and excuse a palpable and flagrant outrage on the right of speech, by implying that only a particular description of persons should exercise that right? Are we, at such a time, when a great principle has been struck down, to quench the moral indignation which the deed excites, by casting reflections upon those on whose persons the outrage has been committed? After all the arguments for liberty to which Boston has listened for more than a quarter of a century, has she yet to learn that the time to assert a right is the time when the right itself is called in question, and that the men of all others to assert it are the men to whom the right has been denied?

It would be no vindication of the right of speech to prove that certain gentlemen of great distinction, eminent for their learning and ability, are allowed to freely express their opinions on all subjects - including the subject of slavery. Such a vindication would need, itself, to be vindicated. It would add insult to injury. Not even an old-fashioned abolition meeting could vindicate that right in Boston just now. There can be no right of speech where any man, however lifted up, or however humble, however young, or however old, is overawed by force, and compelled to suppress his honest sentiments.

Equally clear is the right to hear. To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker. It is just as criminal to rob a man of his right to speak and hear as it would be to rob him of his money. I have no doubt that Boston will vindicate this right. But in order to do so, there must be no concessions to the enemy. When a man is allowed to speak because he is rich and powerful, it aggravates the crime of denying the right to the poor and humble.

The principle must rest upon its own proper basis. And until the right is accorded to the humblest as freely as to the most exalted citizen, the government of Boston is but an empty name, and its freedom a mockery. A man's right to speak does not depend upon where he was born or upon his color. The simple quality of manhood is the solid basis of the right - and there let it rest forever.
_________

Mary Neal
http://wrongfuldeathoflarryneal.com/

Assistance to the Incarcerated Mentally Ill
http://www.Care2.com/c2c/group/AIMI

FreeSpeakBlog
http://freespeakblog.blogspot.com/


 

 
 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.

Author

Mary Neal
female, age 57, divorced, 2 children
Stone Mountain, GA, USA
Shares by Type:
All (582) | Blog (577) | Alert (1) | Poll (1) | Photo (1) | Message (2)

Showing shares tagged with: infowar [show all]
SHARES FROM MARY'S NETWORK
Jun
7
(0 comments  |  discussions )
How To Be An Ally To Indigenous Peoples Text & Sponsor: Two Row Wampum Renewal Campaign www.honorthetworow.org 2013 marks the 400th Anniversary of the Two Row Wampum Treaty between the Dutch and the Haudenosaunee {Iroquois}. T...
May
12
(1 comments  |  discussions )
Mama's Day Cards You Won't Find at the Drugstore Society & Culture  (tags: mothersday, mothers, families, queer, transgender, immigrants, strongfamilies ) BMutiny  - huffingtonpost.com The group...commissioned a group of artis...
May
9
(0 comments  |  discussions )
The largest genocide in human history happened where? Most people would answer Germany, and the Jewish Holocaust. Actually though, the largest genocide happened in the USA, with the native American Indians, with estimates of 19 million to 100 millio...
May
8
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Official Nuclear Radiation Study; Tokyo University Hayno, R.S., et al (2013) Internal Radiocesium Contamination of Adults and Children 7 to 20 Months After the Fukushima NPP Accident as Measured by Extensive Whole-Body-Counter Surveys, Proc. Jpn....
May
6
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Toxic radiation accumulates in water supplies after nuclear accidents. Radiation bioconcentrates in fish that live in fresh water and salt water. Runoff of fresh water from land which has been contaminated ends up contaminating oceans, and salt wate...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
66 Atomic Bombs were exploded on the Bikini Island Atolls. Hundreds of islanders were removed from the islands, but not from harms way. One hydrogen bomb exploded near the islands, and the children played with the dust from the bomb, as it fel...
May
5
(0 comments  |  discussions )
"Under our current law, a suspected terrorist on the FBI's No-Fly List can't board an airplane -- but they can still legally purchase guns and explosives. This loophole, known as the “Terror Gap,” is ...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
Germany added more solar panels in one month, than the US did in ONE YEAR. Nearly 1/3 of Germany power output is handled by bottoms up solar energy during the middle of the day. The transition to a 100% renewable energy nation is in process. T...
(0 comments  |  discussions )
http://www.upworthy.com/ /the-top-8-ways-to-be-tra ditionally-married-accord ing-to-the-bible?c=upw1 According to the Old Testament, which defines all of the 'rules' of traditional marriage, the above examples are all of the ways that couples can be ...
(0 comments  |  0 discussions )
What is the difference between bailing out or helping people at the bottom, or giving corporate welfare to the top 1%? The example of Iceland, compared to the US, provides us with a good comparison.  "Nobel prize winning economist Jo...

Copyright © 2013 Care2.com, inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved