Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (16326)	7/1/2002 4:11:21 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Just what did Jewel say that was so wrong? He, a believer, said take those 2 words out, they're coercive. I, a non-believer, said leave them in, this is not worth a major war. Original intent? What's wrong with original intent? That you don't get to rewrite the fundamental rules whenever you have a braincramp? Or in accordance with the latest PC fad? Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The wording there refers to speech- -vibrations in gases- -and the press- -ink on paper. It could be argued that therefore movies, videos, and electronic means of information transfer are not covered and the gov't may impose whatever restrictions on them it pleases. BUT it is understood the intent of the Founders was to protect speech and information in whatever form from gov't regulation. Or mostly understood. Gov'ts love to take a different view of that, though- -by using those who consider the concept of original intent archaic.