Clear and Present Danger!

“It was not by accident or coincidence that the rights to freedom in speech and press were coupled in a single guaranty with the rights of grievances. All these, though not identical, are inseparable. They are cognate rights, and therefore are united in the first Article’s assurance.”
~ Associate Supreme court Justice Wiley B. Rutledge ~ 1944

It is often we forget that in order to retain out rights we as human beings are forced to give into what is sometimes the most unimaginable. We hope that the justice system will do the right thing and make right a wrong but in many cases even the highest system of justice is held to a power beyond itself. It’s a power of checks and balances… a power of which this nation was founded on; one, which time and time again has been sought out for guidance when it comes to questions of ethics or morality.

The constitution while not black and white has always been the beacon of light when it comes to issues of political correctness as it’s left to spell out the rights of every man and woman with regards to personal self. Sometimes the issues of this country are not always clear and we are forced once again to seek out the guidance of this document and recently we needed to do so. The issue in question is whether the members of an anti-gay church have the right to protest at funerals of openly gay soldiers.

The Supreme Court has always applied the same test with regards to freedom of speech issues; as to whether those who are practicing their right to freedom of speech are pressuring or in sighting others to break the law or putting others in danger… if so then it is within the rights of the law to punish these people accordingly this is often referred to as the “Clear and Present Danger” question. This litmus test provides the court with the tools needed to see what is and is not protected under the first amendment.

Due to recent events in the world the government has been under huge scrutiny as to how it deals with first Amendment issues, in the post 9/11 society we often hear of wire tapping, people being unable to talk about certain issues, cloak and dagger government tactics and yet in some cases like the one mentioned above its clear as day in how we should proceed. Do the people of the anti-gay church have the right to protest? YES! Do I agree with what they are saying? NO! But sometimes part of protecting the law of every man and woman is going along with what’s right and not with what we want to be right.

Like Justice Rutledge; I am left to believe that the right to hold an opinion while positive or negative; is one that we should protect regardless of its misdirected hate or un-proportional glorification of any topic and today I stand with the Supreme Courts decision to uphold the anti-gay churches right to protests.