A Penn State history and English major misses the mark:
It is true that under the law, we are granted the freedom of speech, assembly and press; however, using these freedoms in such a way that does not foster the wellbeing of all citizens, not just a single group, is unjust.
Actually, our Founding Fathers agreed that it is the role of government to preserve the rights which God gave. The law grants me nothing. Please don’t tell me what is unjust, and how I only have the right to speak as long as I “…foster the welbeing of all citizens…”
[By the way, spellcheck says it is well being.]
When a group of people use the freedoms expressed in the First Amendment to discriminate and tear others down, they do not deserve to have such freedoms. Those that use this freedom for the well-being of all people have a right to encourage others to follow by their example.
Once again, I’m not sure “…they don’t deserve to have such freedoms…” is a phrase which you’ll find in the United State’s Constitution, or in the writings of the Framers. Apparently this writer would like to fast track certain speech out of existence. That’s not how this works.
I don’t think the author of the essay should be hounded by internet jackals for these silly notions. I just wonder how such a thing happens. A junior history major at a major (as in expensive) school can write this without being embarrassed.
The new Skeptic magazine has a good article about the Berkeley riots, called Radically Wrong in Berkeley.” It’s worth a read. There are errors of fact, but the tone is correct: The left is making itself look very bad — by trying to limit other people’s right to free expression.
Violent demonstrations in Berkeley, purporting to “fight fascism,” fuel it [the image of the left as anti-free speech] instead; they not only communicate a negative image of the left to the entire country but also confirm the convictions of the assaulted right-wing protestors: the violent opposition that they encounter, which is abetted by the inaction of the Berkeley police,1 reinforces their conception of the left as antagonistic to talk that it does not like. They leave our town strongly convinced that the left is an enemy of free speech.
That’s because it’s true.