Dear San Francisco Chronicle editor,

Once again our high court has said free speech is solo utterance, that is, “message” material which is “protected” by the First Amendment no matter how indecent, offensive, demeaning, manipulative, corrupting, exploitive, or hateful and violence provoking.  And no matter how commercial.

Whatever free speech is constitutionally, it is immune to legislative tampering (remember? “Congress shall make NO LAW…”)  The Supreme Court thinks there is a freedom of speaking, but speaking or “expressing” oneself to another involves inter-citizen conduct.  The First Amendment does not pertain to such conduct, and NO ONE CAN SHOW ORIGINAL INTENT IN THIS REGARD.

Thus, the First Amendment is invoked in total error.

The speech that is free is a process which develops communal thinking and hence the collective will.  We call it democratic process, and it is typified in the historic parliamentary chamber and other peaceful meetings of free and equal citizens. 

Oh, I almost forgot.  The word speech in colonial days meant conversation, as in the phrase, “I wish to have speech with you.”

Respectfully,
Louis Worth Jones
 
 

1997