Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr. Silverback
Just because a black-robed potentate says it is doesn't mean that has anything to do with original intent. I don't know about you, but I think it's long past time we stopped acting like it does.

I couldn't agree more. Let's see what James Madison had to say about the First Amendment:

So insatiable is a love of power that it has resorted to a distinction between the freedom and licentiousness of the press for the purpose of converting the third amendment of the Constitution, which was dictated by the most lively anxiety to preserve that freedom, into an instrument for abridging it.

--James Madison, Address of the General Assembly to the People of the Commonwealth of Virginia, 23 Jan. 1799 Writings 6:333--36

______________________________________

Is, then, the Federal Government, it will be asked, destitute of every authority for restraining the licentiousness of the press, and for shielding itself against the libellous attacks which may be made on those who administer it?

The Constitution alone can answer this question. If no such power be expressly delegated, and if it be not both necessary and proper to carry into execution an express power--above all, if it be expressly forbidden, by a declaratory amendment to the Constitution--the answer must be, that the Federal Government is destitute of all such authority.

James Madison, Report on the Virginia Resolutions, Jan. 1800 Writings 6:385--401

______________________________________

It appears that Madison believed the First Amendment protected licentiousness when it came to freedom the press.

In light of Madison's writings, what evidence do you have that the original intent/meaning of the First Amendment was only meant to protect political and religious speech?

107 posted on 12/14/2007 7:47:20 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]


To: Ken H
In light of Madison's writings, what evidence do you have that the original intent/meaning of the First Amendment was only meant to protect political and religious speech?

Was porn still illegal in the colonies?

110 posted on 12/14/2007 7:59:11 PM PST by Mr. Silverback (Support Scouting: Raising boys to be strong men and politically incorrect at the same time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]

To: Ken H

Note that Madison understood full well that the First Amendment depended on the existence of the Third Amendment. From time to time I post the whole argument that links the First, Second and Third together as a rational basis for LIBERTY.


121 posted on 12/15/2007 4:03:08 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson