re freedom in u s a in article apr cs ucla edu steven surya cs ucla edu steven berson writes hm cs brown edu harry mamaysky writes bull shit there is no reason in the world why we can t say that taking views analogous to the kkk s or some such organization is wrong there is no reason why some morality may not be legislated as it is we do not allow theft or murder or rape why should we allow hateful sppech whose only purpose is to stir anger and violence harry i think the answer to mr mayamsky s question can be found in the mr mamaysky s first amendment to the us constitution amendment i 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 steve i do not say that freedom of speech should be banned far from it i am merely suggesting that there are certain things which can be universally agreed to be morally incorrect there are not many such things but there are some as an example murder is morally incorrect the idea that one group of people is somehow racially inferior to another is morally incorrect etc the point is that any action which serves to promote a morally incorrect action should be forbidden this implies that no one has the right to say that an innocent person should be murdered regardless of freedom of speech i may not stand on a street corner and advocate the murder of innocent people the reason for this is that murder is a morally incorrect action in the same way since bigotry is morally incorrect in the narrow definition which we have given it i nor any one else has the right to stand on a street corner and promote bigotry such an enforcement does in no way deny any one their rights as guaranteed by the first amendment it merely ensures that no person may be the target of an attempt to deny him a fundamental moral right such as the right to not be murdered and the right not to be discriminated against i believe mr berson that to blindly accept the constitution is a terrific mistake we must cinstantly question the constitution and interpret it in a way befitting the society in which we live anything short of such an effort would render us little more than trained monkeys who are able to merely repeat what they have heard without paying the slightest bit of attention to the intent of the document in question would you disagree mr berson harry
