Sir Thomas More urged King Henry VIII of England to allow freedom of speech in the English parliament. But in the conflict between the First Amendment and the Left’s social engineering efforts, free speech has been much more durable than freedom of religion, and thus litigation which really seeks religious freedom is formulated as a claim to free speech.īurns observed that an early free speech argument can be traced to a man often identified with religious freedom, and especially in the current conflict over freedom of conscience against the state. There can be no constitutional protection of oppressive ideas (even though it was emphasized in the argument against social conservative censorship that freedom is important precisely when it offends sensibilities). Thus the claim that these constitutional guarantees are inapplicable against whatever is cast as civil rights law and policy. What is being attempted is to change private religious and moral beliefs and social convention with the force of the law, and for that, the First Amendment guarantees of freedom of religion, speech, association, and the press stand in the way. It might be added to this that really the entire First Amendment is under attack by the cultural Left. ![]() Both are under attack at the present time, but religious freedom is both more specific and broader in scope than freedom of speech, so that specifically religious freedom is needed to protect religious belief and practice, Burns maintained. ![]() ![]() Daniel Burns, Assistant Professor of Politics at the University of Dallas, discussed the important differences between freedom of religion and freedom of speech at the Catholic University of America on September 17.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |