Is a death knell tolling for the First Amendment?

Is a death knell tolling for the First Amendment?

July 12, 2001

'Smatter of Fact
By Katharhynn Heidelberg

Mark Twain once said, "There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies and statistics."

One hopes that a recent statistic is, in fact, a lie. According to a recent radio report, 46 percent of Americans believe "the First Amendment goes too far...people shouldn’t be allowed to say whatever they want."

Talk about a jaw dropper. First, one wonders if this alleged 46 percent has ever read the First Amendment: "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."

That’s a good deal more than "freedom of speech." And, here’s one other small matter these Americans have failed to consider, as they volunteer to hand over their rights: Who will choose what speech is acceptable, and how will any limitation be enforced?

Too many assume that everyone thinks like they do, so their standards will be the definitive ones. Too many forget that America is a vast melting pot of various opinions, beliefs, and yes, forms of speech. And of this 46 percent, apparently everyone has forgotten that the First Amendment is the very thing protecting their right to say they don’t approve of it.

By it, we may vocally defend our Second Amendment rights. By it, newspapers and other media outlets can inform the public, without government interference, even if that information is not always what the public wants to hear. The First protects war protesters; it protects war supporters. It protects pro-life advocates; it protects pro-choice advocates. It protects what I agree with; it protects what I do not agree with.

For instance, I would rather author Kate Cann had aimed her new series, "Ready?", "Sex" and "Go!" at any other audience than young-adult readers (ages 12 to 18), who already live in a sexually-saturated society. Happily, Cann’s right to write and sell what she chooses does not depend on my approval. (Besides, this clears the way for me to trot out: "He Told All His Friends I Was Easy", "What Do You Mean, I Have an STD?!" and "Pregnant? But, What About My Childhood?")

But rights are not always so easy to defend, nor is the right to "say anything" always a clear-cut issue.

A case in point is Brian Dalton, a Columbus, Ohio, resident recently sentenced to 10 years in prison. Dalton kept a journal about sexually abusing and torturing children. This is repulsive, evil and disturbing. However, Dalton’s stories were fictitious, and kept secured in his home. At no time did he act on any of these fantasies; at no time did he distribute his journal to others. It may have been on his agenda to do so, but the American legal system is not designed to prosecute people on the basis of what they might do.

Had these children been real, or had Dalton put his trash on the Internet, thereby continually exploiting children in a publicly accessible format, then he would most certainly be "guilty of pandering obscenity involving a minor."

But a thought — no matter how twisted and filthy; no matter how uncomfortable; no matter how hard to defend — is not a crime in and of itself. If we allow Dalton to be jailed for the thoughts he wrote down in a personal diary, who’s next? That’s something we would all do well to consider.

What the First Amendment defends is not always popular — or even comprehensible to decent, moral human beings. Nonetheless, it recognizes the inalienable right to say and believe what we choose. Apparently, 46 percent of us have failed to understand this very simple concept. Maybe that isn’t so small a matter after all.