BryonD
Hero
(pet peeve)
The not abridging free speech part is clearly intended to state that free speech exists in the absence of the Constitution and the Congress and that the Congress may not take it away.
Thus, when people claim that free speech doesn't apply outside that framework they are missing the most important part of the statement.
(/pet peeve)
You are wrong.
He is right.
He doesn't have the right to say anything he wants on someone else's message board. But otuside that he exactly does have freedom of speech to express any opinion he wants and Congress and the Constution have nothing to do with that beyond not taking it away.
The not abridging free speech part is clearly intended to state that free speech exists in the absence of the Constitution and the Congress and that the Congress may not take it away.
Thus, when people claim that free speech doesn't apply outside that framework they are missing the most important part of the statement.
(/pet peeve)
You are wrong.
He is right.
He doesn't have the right to say anything he wants on someone else's message board. But otuside that he exactly does have freedom of speech to express any opinion he wants and Congress and the Constution have nothing to do with that beyond not taking it away.