26th May 2004, 6:15 PM
That's what I was thinking here. He HAD the right to say whatever he wanted. HOWEVER, you don't have the right to an audience. You have the challenge of GETTING an audience. You can't FORCE anyone to listen to you. Say all you want, you are free to, but when you are drowned out by booing it's only as represive to free speech as people just walking out the door and covering their ears. Either way, the words he said wouldn't have been heard, even though he wanted to listen to them. People don't have a responsibility to sit down and listen to any conversation aimed at them ya know. Also keep in mind that there's nothing about free speech that says, even when someone has agreed to hear you out, that they can't just go ahead and change their mind later and stop listening.
Now, if they actually went as far as to SILENCE him, by restraining him or trying to shut down HIS OWN sources of expression, like a web site or a TV show, THEN it's repressing free speech.
Now, if they actually went as far as to SILENCE him, by restraining him or trying to shut down HIS OWN sources of expression, like a web site or a TV show, THEN it's repressing free speech.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)