In response to:

Chuck Schumer: There Should Be Limits to the First Amendment

Anne_1 Wrote: Jul 18, 2012 8:21 AM
The “free speech” guaranteed in the 1st Amend is POLITICAL FREE SPEECH only.
Mattieohmalley Wrote: Jul 18, 2012 8:44 AM

Good point. And I don't hear Chuck interested in opposing those restrictions. Especially the one put on churches by the criminally-minded LBJ.
Anne_1 Wrote: Jul 18, 2012 8:43 AM
Read it more closely, or get someone to explain it to you.
Shawn72 Wrote: Jul 18, 2012 8:40 AM
Sigh... did it again I forgot to sign...

Shawn72 Wrote: Jul 18, 2012 8:39 AM
I disagree... therefore from this moment on I deem that all of my communications are political in nature... especially when I'm singing in the shower or playing with my dog.

Pffft...! Where in the Constitution does it say 'political free speech?' No where!
gwharpo Wrote: Jul 18, 2012 8:28 AM
wmou Wrote: Jul 18, 2012 8:23 AM
Religious speech is also protected, but you would not know it by the restrictions put on by the Federeal Courts.

While debating the DISCLOSE Act last night on the Senate floor, New York Senator Chuck Schumer called for restrictions on the First Amendment, citing other laws and regulations already in place in the United States that do so.

I believe there ought to be limits because the First Amendment is not absolute. No amendment is absolute. You can’t scream ‘fire’ falsely in a crowded theater. We have libel laws. We have anti-pornography laws. All of those are limits on the First Amendment. Well, what could be more important than the wellspring of our democracy? And certain limits...