Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Webby
What rights to "free speech" are you claiming to defend?? The FBI busted Rosie initially because she may have committed obscene publications offenses. Not because they were limiting her "rights to free speech". If it's decided the alleged offenses are of substance, a jury will decide in the end whether the content is obscene or not.
You got a problem with that??
|
I have a problem with any government suppressing free speech.
What you are saying does not make any sense. You are saying that because they busted Larry Flynt and charged him with a crime, then it has nothing to do with free speech.
There are two issues. The first is that obscenity is not even in the constitution. The second is that charging someone with a crime for speech is always related to freedom and free speech.
Think about your argument in regards to China. If China decides to execute bloggers for publishing blogs critical of the government, which is illegal in that country, does that issue have to do with free speech? Does it have to do with freedom? Just because a government makes something illegal does not mean it doesn't have anything to do with freedom and free speech rights. The opposite of what you are saying is true.
When the government tries to suppress speech, that is the definition of attacking personal freedom and civil rights.