Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

A question about Free Speech and Property Rights

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I have finished reading this article http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Supreme_Cou...ory?id=10770402 and I have a question about the proper resolution to this conflict. The conflict should be resolved by property rights (the owner would decide who to let on their property or not). So this is another example of how public property works to destroy our other rights? I am assuming that cemetaries are public property.

David McBride

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why?

For the same reason stalking should properly be held as illegal.

It's forceful intrusion on the life of another.

Holding a protest near a funeral with the intention of disturbing and upsetting the attendees is nothing more than that.

Unfortunately one part of individual rights is the right to be a complete asshole.

Not to harass people.

I don't know the most widely accepted Objectivist view regarding harassment, only Peikoff's statement regarding telemarketers in a podcast (saying that he considered telemarketing a "physical intrusion" and "harassment"). I agree, though I'm not sure if he'd hold the same view in regard to protesting at funerals. I most certainly do.

Edited by Minarchist
Link to post
Share on other sites
Minarchist, I assume that you support the "Respect for America’s Fallen Heroes Act", which

was created largely in part to help stem the tide of the Followers of Phelps?

Wiki

I don't think such conditions (300 feet / for an hour before and an hour after the funeral) are proper. As much as I'd like to keep things in objective measurements where possible, this is just one of those cases where a more broad anti-harassment law will have to suffice.

I haven't put much thought into the specifics of enforcement, though. I just believe that it's immoral to harass people, and should be illegal as well.

Edited by Minarchist
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think such conditions (300 feet / for an hour before and an hour after the funeral) are proper. As much as I'd like to keep things in objective measurements where possible, this is just one of those cases where a more broad anti-harassment law will have to suffice.
Why are those conditions not proper? They are objectively stated and, given the intent of disallowing harassment which you accepted, objectively justified.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I have finished reading this article http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Supreme_Cou...ory?id=10770402 and I have a question about the proper resolution to this conflict. The conflict should be resolved by property rights (the owner would decide who to let on their property or not). So this is another example of how public property works to destroy our other rights? I am assuming that cemetaries are public property.

David McBride

``Now, all but two state attorneys general have signed a "friend of the court" brief, to be filed tomorrow, that argues the First Amendment should not apply to some "intrusive and harassing" forms of expression.``

This seems to package speech/assembly against the government with speech/assembly against private citizens. That would be a scary precedent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know of the following exceptions to freedom of assembly:

  • infringing upon the free movement of goods or people
  • causing personal injury
  • physically endangering others
  • damaging property
  • national security
  • interfering with proceedings

In order to determine whether there are any others that can be put into place without infringing on the right of assembly, it will be necessary to identify the similarities among these exceptions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This seems to package speech/assembly against the government with speech/assembly against private citizens. That would be a scary precedent.
All criticism of candidates for public office is speech against private citizens. It is a good thing that freedom of speech is not limited to speech against government action.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...