Comments on: Making Free Speech Free http://www.dissentdecree.net/2010/01/31/making-free-speech-free/ Sun, 29 Aug 2010 23:09:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Mike http://www.dissentdecree.net/2010/01/31/making-free-speech-free/comment-page-1/#comment-1276 Mike Sat, 12 Jun 2010 11:58:48 +0000 http://www.dissentdecree.net/?p=955#comment-1276 Specifically the bill was aimed at "journalists," not all writers. The problem of course is defining who and what a journalist is. In my opinion, licensing writers would be the elimination of the right to freedom of speech--which by-the-way, the founders expressly said applied only to political speech (and this can be words or images). Of course it must be pointed out that there is no Constitutional guarantee of being published. Publishers and editors have no legal obligation to publish anything or everything submitted to them. Likewise, the law does not permit libel, however, the aggrieved party must prove the charge. There also have been moves to license graphic designers--much of it from practicing designers hoping to preserve their jobs. However, as I pointed out earlier free speech extends to images as well as words and this has been upheld by the Supreme Court more than once. Designers seeking to be licensed should have some remedial lessons in civics and Constitutional rights. Bottom line... I absolutely do not support the licensing of writers, journalists, designers, illustrators, painters--of any form of political speech no matter how offensive the message may be. Without freedom of speech there simply is no freedom. Without the availability of all forms of publishing and opinion, people are subjected to ignorance, and ignorance is not bliss. It is a prison for the mind. Specifically the bill was aimed at “journalists,” not all writers. The problem of course is defining who and what a journalist is.

In my opinion, licensing writers would be the elimination of the right to freedom of speech–which by-the-way, the founders expressly said applied only to political speech (and this can be words or images). Of course it must be pointed out that there is no Constitutional guarantee of being published. Publishers and editors have no legal obligation to publish anything or everything submitted to them. Likewise, the law does not permit libel, however, the aggrieved party must prove the charge.

There also have been moves to license graphic designers–much of it from practicing designers hoping to preserve their jobs. However, as I pointed out earlier free speech extends to images as well as words and this has been upheld by the Supreme Court more than once. Designers seeking to be licensed should have some remedial lessons in civics and Constitutional rights.

Bottom line… I absolutely do not support the licensing of writers, journalists, designers, illustrators, painters–of any form of political speech no matter how offensive the message may be. Without freedom of speech there simply is no freedom. Without the availability of all forms of publishing and opinion, people are subjected to ignorance, and ignorance is not bliss. It is a prison for the mind.

]]> By: Max W. Little http://www.dissentdecree.net/2010/01/31/making-free-speech-free/comment-page-1/#comment-1275 Max W. Little Sat, 12 Jun 2010 02:24:36 +0000 http://www.dissentdecree.net/?p=955#comment-1275 Mike I understand that a Michigan state legislator introduced a bill in the state legislature to require licensing of writers. What is your opinion of this affect on the first ammendment? Mike
I understand that a Michigan state legislator introduced a bill in the state legislature to require licensing of writers. What is your opinion of this affect on the first ammendment?

]]>