When do you cross the line that divides freedom of speech from treason?
Does anyone remember treason? It's the only offense other than murder and kidnapping that is punishable by death. Most people justify inappropriate statements and accusations as freedom of speech when in actuality, they don't know what that amendment means.
The only (legal) dividing line between absolute and total carte blanche freedom of speech is *TRUTH*. The only exceptions I can think of are a professional standard of confidentiality (and, incidentally, an absolutely unambiguous mandate of compliance therewith!) such as among medical professionals, and those in my field of (special) education, and those folks who, with a high security clearance and the access to very priviliged and/or volatile information, work perhaps in government or nuclear science, who have voluntarily and of sound mind, accepted such free speech restrictions as a condition of their work and position. Again, barring those, and maybe a smattering of similarly sensitive examples where said basic human rignt is FREELY sacrificed, the only standard to which most of us are held wrt to free speech/press/expression is truth, or perhaps, with regard to art and/or nudity or hateful expression, or that which directly and deliberately incites violence or other illegal behavior. In general, the truth is our shield, our right, and our responsibility.
You may cross the line when what is done is harmful to others and a danger to the common well being of all. True we have freedoms in the country of America, yet there is a certain line that when crossed, can get you in a world of hurt.
I'm with you, but again that raises the question about the bounty in Florida for Zimmerman and the threatening speech by Farrakhan.
The way the line is crossed makes all the difference..as they say.."action speaks louder than words"!I know of one that had written treasonous things and made threats on the internet, and even though they were young, got arrested and held.
First, under U.S. federal law, "inappropriate statements and actions" do NOT ever translate to treason.
It is just that nowadays, a number of people are of the mistaken impression that when someone or some entity is harshly critical of President Obama -- and/or accuse him of being such things as a socialist and anti-American -- they are committing treason.
However, being highly critical of a president or accusing one of being an "enemy of the State" never comes anywhere close to being treason. Such expressions are merely examples of "freedom of speech."
For example, most would consider it to be totally inappropropriate to state that a president is a "rotten anti-American S.O.B.," or that one is a "traitor who is siding with the enemies of the U.S."
However, even though such statements might be in "bad taste" or "way over the top," they are in no way treasonous. They are nothing more than episodes of particular individuals or entities venting or spouting "what's on their minds."
The only time it is treason is when an individual or entity gets caught in the act of helping an enemy of the U.S. to inflict harm on the country and/or its inhabitants.
Furthermore, the only places in which is it treasonous to be openly critical of national leaders -- and to publicly express "inappropriate things" about them -- is such societies as Cuba, North Korea and Red China.
In summation, in the United States of America, there is no such thing as "crossing the line that divides freedom of speech from treason."
Thx for a fact-f'ld parsing of the wide gap (in US law) btw'n "unprotected speech" and "levying war against (The US), or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort". Not at all akin to falsely yelling "fire!" in theatre, a misdemeaner.
by RealityTalk4 years ago
Is freedom of speech compromised in America today?It appears difficult to publish articles pertaining to racism, unless the racist in question is white skinned. It also appears difficult to publish articles...
by irachx6 months ago
Do we really have freedom of speech?
by edmondpogi6 years ago
Is it ever right for Governments to restrict freedom of speech?
by LoliHey14 months ago
Doesn't freedom of speech mean that there are no consequences?Lately we hear about people losing their jobs for stuff they tweet and post. People say, "Well, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from...
by Tessa Schlesinger24 months ago
Why are Christians permitted by law to prosyletize on the streets? Shouldn't it be made illegal?Religious organizations do not pay taxes so they should not be permitted the use of the streets for their 'work.' In...
by Michael Collins4 years ago
Today we are seeing a movement toward tolerance or at least what we think as tolerance. Bulling has become a hot button issue in the public (as if it didn’t happen anytime before) with many different groups against...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.