Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
Login | What's Hot
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, December 09, 2007
Paul Jacob :: Townhall.com Columnist
Calling a censor a censor — censored!
by Paul Jacob
Forward Print Share Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


And it did. Paul Fromm, a free-speech activist and founder of Canadians Associated for Free Expression — a group defending the worst “hate sites,” and thus said to “have links” with them (how deep those ties are I do not know; the matter irrelevant for my purposes, anyway) — has repeatedly called Warman an “enemy of free speech.” And similar things.

And so what did Warman do?

He sued.

For libel.

And won.

And was awarded $30,000.

Why? The judge ruled that a government official working from duly enacted government policy cannot be an enemy of free speech. That’s just unthinkable!

Yes, in Canada you may not speak the truth about free speech to its official enemies. In Canada, the reason why we must defend even the most vile speech and writing becomes clear: because suppression of it eventually leads to the inability to criticize government.

You know you’ve lost your freedom when you cannot call a censor a censor.

But here in the United States, we can. Well, at least for now.

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | < Previous
Share:
Forward Print Single Page
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Paul Jacob is President of Citizens in Charge. His daily Common Sense commentary appears on the Web, via e-mail, and on radio stations across America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.

Join The Debate!

Post Your Comment
(39 comments so Far)
View in ascending order     View in descending order
Reply # 1
Date: Dec 14, 2007 - 1:57 AM EST
there have been sevral
comments concerning responsibility and free speech. I can agree with that but I have a problem with how it's defined and enforced. People and businesses are now sued over comments, which is ridiculous and unjust. Minorities seem to be exempt from these rules as they have made many hateful and racist/sexist public comments with no punishment. When was the last time a black person was prosecuted for a hate crime? Black on white violence is far more common than white on black, yet there is never a mention of a hate crime involved, except by the common person, who then is ignored. These policies are, in my opinion, what is fueling the racial divide in this country. Black anger is continually stoked by liberals and black leaders and whites are tired of the unequal rules. Does racism exist? Sure it does and a (minority) of all races will always be racist but we shouldn't pander to the lowest denominator like we are.
Flag as Offensive

Reply # 2
Date: Dec 10, 2007 - 11:22 AM EST
Freedom of Speech
"A government official acting on duly enacted government policy". Interesting words that were probably the same basis for laws enacted against Jews in the 1930's in Germany.

Once you have terminolgies such as "hate speech" codified into law, it is only a matter of time before someone in a position of power who does not like what you say will attempt to silence you under the guise of "hate speech".... unless you agree with the government.

Some of our Founding Fathers did not want the Bill of Rights in the Constitution because they felt these were God-given rights. Once you codify them into man-made documents it gives the appearance that these are "human rights" bestowed by government. All you have to do is get rid of this "God" stuff. What government giveth, government can taketh away.

Hate speech laws are unidirectional. It does not work in reverse. Wait until it is "your free speech" that gets infringed, you will feel differently then. Are some things that people say disgusting ?? Absolutley, but there is a looming danger when you let the genie out of the bottle and pass laws restricting speech. There are many people who need to read the 1st amendment. It is very explicit. Our Founding Fathers were far wiser than we give them credit.

Flag as Offensive
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
 *
State:
 *
Zip:
 *
Phone:
       
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.