The Freedom OF Speech - my take!Submitted by The Pen on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 19:39
Ultimately we do not need a Constitutional document in order to claim the capacity that Article V communicates. The true Constitution constitutes within memory and consciousness as taught and learned and is concentrated by our capacity to explain what we’ve been taught and by our kindred that which they have learned from being taught. Speech is essential to our being and functionality as beings. It is by our creation of it free; with or without a document explaining or accentuating such.
It is not ultimately explained what “free” entails regarding [free]dom of speech. Obviously if speech were taxed or subsidized it would not be free. Obviously if speech is free it should not be subject to interpretative analysis based on some granting or apportionment of it. Freedom of speech seems to imply freedom of enunciation, message and intent AND freedom from censor, edit or any otherwise alteration to how one has spoken or written it. Whether a person submits their words/speech to a private institution and agrees to any and all modifications and editing that the agreement may insinuate is another matter, BUT freedom of speech by its foundation is the freedom to communicate as one can and may, as in accordance with their OWN conscience.
Speech should be nothing less than free. Speech is not threatening to its purpose. Speech is the template by which we should recognize the necessity of and vitality in our capacity to create tone and pitch and form language by and through them. The 1st Amendment to the Constitution states that there shall be no law abridging the freedom of speech. However, what is truly meant by freedom of speech? Notice that there is no reference to the freedom in speech, only of it. If the freedom OF speech is not to be abridged or infringed upon, then this is rather telling of the amendment’s blanket declaration that ALL speech should be free as far as speech itself, yet the freedom IN speech, rather the realization of freedom IN and BY speech is only as possible as the freedom OF speech is allowed. If speech itself is abridged or infringed upon, then the realization of freedom IN and BY that very speech as laid in the texts of history to present is not possible. Speech is foundational to the truth of history and present. If speech is not free fundamentally, then it will be conveyed as flawed when laid to the pages of antiquity and modernity. This should be recognized without documentation to support it, uphold it or protect it.
The pages of all history are written for the preservation of victors, whatever station held or power represented. Technically, the freedom of speech has been abridged since its development. We are starting to see the unraveling of the suppression of speech in our time. The freedom OF speech, for the first time in history is reaching a point where it will soon be IMPOSSIBLE to abridge or infringe upon it. This is where technology has served its brilliance of purpose. And as we here at the DP understand, the abridgment and infringement OF speech is showing itself to have been quite monumental for many, many years. We see the abridging of speech by the contents of the textbooks in our own children’s schools, whether by the telling of incomplete truths or the non-disclosure of facts from their precedent past.
Freedom OF speech is evolutionary, but the freedom IN speech, rather the realization of freedom IN and BY speech can only be ascertained if the freedom OF speech is not abridged, infringed upon or censored. Surely we do not need the Constitution to tell us that. The freedom of speech is the foundation to the very existence of the Constitution itself, as speech lends itself unequivocally to written form.
Peace and Love always.