Freedom Of Speech Network
Where EVERYBODY Has The Rights To Be Wrong!  The First Amendment: Use It or LOSE IT!



"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 people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."


This outreach ministry is aimed at protecting the one thing that MUST be eradicated in order to make way for the New World Order and the Antichrist to set up shop as President of the Earth. That one thing is.... The American First Amendment Right To Free Speech & Free Religious Assembly!


Like my Pastor, Dr. Gene Scott, always used to say, "If you're going to be a Christian, then BE ONE!" The Freedom Of Speech Network is made from my private collection of Domain names. (Like USA Patriot Each one is designed to follow specific End Times events, symptoms, and politics. More importantly, each one is designed to prove the Right of Free Speech, and to fly our colors, (The Blood of Jesus) in the Devil's face for as long as we have the right to freely assemble as a church, and to shout JESUS SAVES!

Now's your chance to put your money, beliefs, and FAITH where they'll really count.


Addison B. Bachman
Promised Land Community Church

Can You Help US To Exercise
The First Amendment?

Use the button below to PAY your respects!

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Hello My Fellow American's, May God's Peace and Grace be Yours Today.

My name is Addison B. Bachman. I'm a preacher in a small town in New Mexico. If you call yourself a Christian, I'm talking directly to you. I need your help and prayers.

I don't know a Christian that wont tell you they think the end is near, in their lifetime, or anytime now. I agree, and according to my Bible, a lot happens before "The End" comes. To name a few: False Prophets, Antichrists', The 666 Mark, Cashless society, One World Government, One World Leader, Pre - Mid - And Post Rapture(s), Armageddon, and the 2nd Coming of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

So, if we all think, and agree, the end is near, then all these other things must be happening, or are about to happen. The Antichrist must be positioning for his appointed purpose and short reign as World Leader.



In order to be appropriately knowledgeable, there must be no constraints on the free flow of information and ideas. According to Meiklejohn, democracy will not be true to its essential ideal if those in power are able to manipulate the electorate by withholding information and stifling criticism. Meiklejohn acknowledges that the desire to manipulate opinion can stem from the motive of seeking to benefit society. However, he argues, choosing manipulation negates, in its means, the democratic ideal. Eric Barendt has called the defence of free speech on the grounds of democracy "probably the most attractive and certainly the most fashionable free speech theory in modern Western democracies".

Thomas I. Emerson expanded on this defense when he argued that freedom of speech helps to provide a balance between stability and change. Freedom of speech acts as a "safety valve" to let off steam when people might otherwise be bent on revolution. He argues that "The principle of open discussion is a method of achieving a moral adaptable and at the same time more stable community, of maintaining the precarious balance between healthy cleavage and necessary consensus." Emerson furthermore maintains that "Opposition serves a vital social function in offsetting or ameliorating (the) normal process of bureaucratic decay."

Research undertaken by the Worldwide Governance Indicators project at the World Bank, indicates that freedom of speech, and the process of accountability that follows it, have a significant impact in the quality of governance of a country. "Voice and Accountability" within a country, defined as "the extent to which a country's citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and free media" is one of the six dimensions of governance that the Worldwide Governance Indicators measure for more than 200 countries.

Social interaction and community

Richard Moon has developed the argument that the value of freedom of speech and freedom of expression lies with social interactions. Moon writes that "by communicating an individual forms relationships and associations with others - family, friends, co-workers, church congregation, and countrymen. By entering into discussion with others an individual participates in the development of knowledge and in the direction of the community."

Limitations on freedom of speech

A National Geographic Magazine censored by Iranian authorities. The picture hidden beneath the white sticker is of an embracing couple.
February 2006.

According to the Freedom Forum Organization, legal systems, and society at large, recognize limits on the freedom of speech, particularly when freedom of speech conflicts with other values or rights. Limitations to freedom of speech may follow the "harm principle" or the "offense principle", for example in the case of pornography or "hate speech". Limitations to freedom of speech may occur through legal sanction and/or social disapprobation.

Members of Westboro Baptist Church have been specifically banned from entering Canada for hate speech.

In "On Liberty" (1859) John Stuart Mill argued that "...there ought to exist the fullest liberty of professing and discussing, as a matter of ethical conviction, any doctrine, however immoral it may be considered." Mill argues that the fullest liberty of expression is required to push arguments to their logical limits, rather than the limits of social embarrassment. However, Mill also introduced what is known as the harm principle, in placing the following limitation on free expression: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.

In 1985 Joel Feinberg introduced what is known as the "offence principle", arguing that Mill's harm principle does not provide sufficient protection against the wrongful behaviors of others. Feinberg wrote "It is always a good reason in support of a proposed criminal prohibition that it would probably be an effective way of preventing serious offense (as opposed to injury or harm) to persons other than the actor, and that it is probably a necessary means to that end." Hence Feinberg argues that the harm principle sets the bar too high and that some forms of expression can be legitimately prohibited by law because they are very offensive. But, as offending someone is less serious than harming someone, the penalties imposed should be higher for causing harm. In contrast Mill does not support legal penalties unless they are based on the harm principle. Because the degree to which people may take offense varies, or may be the result of unjustified prejudice, Feinberg suggests that a number of factors need to be taken into account when applying the offense principle, including: the extent, duration and social value of the speech, the ease with which it can be avoided, the motives of the speaker, the number of people offended, the intensity of the offense, and the general interest of the community at large.

The Internet and Information Society

Jo Glanville, editor of the Index on Censorship, states that "the Internet has been a revolution for censorship as much as for free speech". International, national and regional standards recognize that freedom of speech, as one form of freedom of expression, applies to any medium, including the Internet. The World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Declaration of Principles adopted in 2003 makes specific reference to the importance of the right to freedom of expression for the "Information Society" in stating:

"We reaffirm, as an essential foundation of the Information Society, and as outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; that this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Communication is a fundamental social process, a basic human need and the foundation of all social organization. It is central to the Information Society. Everyone, everywhere should have the opportunity to participate and no one should be excluded from the benefits of the Information Society offers."

Freedom of information

Freedom of information is an extension of freedom of speech where the medium of expression is the Internet. Freedom of information may also refer to the right to privacy in the context of the Internet and information technology. As with the right to freedom of expression, the right to privacy is a recognized human right and freedom of information acts as an extension to this right. Freedom of information may also concern censorship in an information technology context, i.e. the ability to access Web content, without censorship or restrictions.

Freedom of information is also explicitly protected by acts such as the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act of Ontario, in Canada.

Internet censorship

A website blocked in Bahrain

The concept of freedom of information has emerged in response to state sponsored censorship, monitoring and surveillance of the internet. Internet censorship includes the control or suppression of the publishing or accessing of information on the Internet.[35] The Global Internet Freedom Consortium advocate for freedom of information for what they term "closed societies". According to the Reporters without Borders (RSF) "internet enemy list" the following states engage in pervasive internet censorship: Belarus, China, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, Myanmar/Burma, North Korea, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

A widely publicized example of internet censorship is the "Great Firewall of China" (in reference both to its role as a network firewall and to the ancient Great Wall of China). The system blocks content by preventing IP addresses from being routed through and consists of standard firewall and proxy servers at the Internet gateways. The system also selectively engages in DNS poisoning when particular sites are requested. The government does not appear to be systematically examining Internet content, as this appears to be technically impractical. Internet censorship in the People's Republic of China is conducted under a wide variety of laws and administrative regulations. In accordance with these laws, more than sixty Internet regulations have been made by the People's Republic of China (PRC) government, and censorship systems are vigorously implemented by provincial branches of state-owned ISPs, business companies, and organizations.

Freedom of speech

Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship and/or limitation. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes used to indicate not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. In practice, the right to freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, such as on "hate speech".

The right to freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognized in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR recognizes the right to freedom of speech as "the right to hold opinions without interference. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression". Furthermore freedom of speech is recognized in European, inter-American and African regional human rights law.

It is different from and not to be confused with the concept of freedom of thought.

The right to freedom of speech
and expression

Freedom of speech, or the freedom of expression, is recognized in international and regional human rights law. The right is enshrined in Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 13 of the American Convention on Human Rights and Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.

The freedom of speech can be found in early human rights documents, such as Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789), a key document of the French Revolution. The Declaration provides for freedom of expression in Article 11, which states that:

"The free communication of ideas and opinions is one of the most precious of the rights of man. Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law."

Based on John Stuart Mill's arguments, freedom of speech today is understood as a multi-faceted right that includes not only the right to express, or disseminate, information and ideas, but three further distinct aspects:

* the right to seek information and ideas;
* the right to receive information and ideas;
* the right to impart information and ideas.

International, regional and national standards also recognize that freedom of speech, as the freedom of expression, includes any medium, be it orally, in written, in print, through the Internet or through art forms. This means that the protection of freedom of speech as a right includes not only the content, but also the means of expression.

Relationship to other rights

The right to freedom of speech is closely related to other rights, and may be limited when conflicting with other rights (see Limitations on freedom of speech). The right to freedom of speech is particularly important for media, which plays a special role as the bearer of the general right to freedom of expression for all (see freedom of the press). The right to freedom of expression is also related to the right to a fair trial and court proceeding which may limit access to the search for information or determine the opportunity and means in which freedom of expression is manifested within court proceedings. As a general principle freedom of expression may not limit the right to privacy, as well as the honor and reputation of others. However greater latitude is given when criticism of public figures is involved.

Origins and academic freedom

Freedom of speech and expression has a long history that predates modern international human rights instruments. Ancient Athenians believed that the power of persuasion is the most enduring force in a culture, one that must not and can not be stifled. It is thought that ancient Athens’ democratic ideology of free speech emerged in the early 7th or later 6th Century BC. Two of the most cherished values of the Roman Republic were freedom of religion and freedom of speech. In Islamic ethics freedom of speech was first declared in the Rashidun period by the caliph Umar in the 7th century. In the Abbasid Caliphate period, freedom of speech was also declared by al-Hashimi (a cousin of Caliph al-Ma'mun) in a letter to one of the religious opponents he was attempting to convert through reason. According to George Makdisi and Hugh Goddard, "the idea of academic freedom" in universities was "modeled on Islamic custom" as practiced in the medieval Madrasah system from the 9th century. Islamic influence was "certainly discernible in the foundation of the first deliberately-planned university" in Europe, the University of Naples Federico II founded by Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor in 1224.

The modern concept of freedom of speech emerged gradually during the European Enlightenment.[13] The England’s Bill of Rights 1689 granted 'freedom of speech in Parliament'. The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, which issued from the French Revolution of 1789, specifically affirmed freedom of speech as an inalienable right. In 1791, freedom of speech was included in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Freedom of speech and truth

One of the earliest Western defenses of freedom of expression is Areopagitica (1644) by English poet and political writer John Milton. Milton wrote in reaction to an attempt by the English republican parliament to prevent "seditious, unreliable, unreasonable and unlicensed pamphlets".

First page of John Milton's
1644 edition of Areopagitica

Milton advanced a number of arguments in defense of freedom of speech. First, he argued that a nation's unity is created through blending individual differences rather than imposing homogeneity from above; that the ability to explore the fullest range of ideas on a given issue was essential to any learning process and truth cannot be arrived upon unless all points of view are first considered; and that by considering free thought, censorship acts to the detriment of material progress.

Milton also argued that if the facts are laid bare, truth will defeat falsehood in open competition, but this cannot be left for a single individual to determine. According to Milton, it is up to each individual to uncover their own truth; no one is wise enough to act as a censor for all individuals.

Noam Chomsky states that: "If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Stalin and Hitler, for example, were dictators in favor of freedom of speech for views they liked only. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise."

In Evelyn Beatrice Hall's biography of Voltaire she used the following quote to illustrate Voltaire's believes: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." The quote is frequently cited to describe the principle of freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech and tolerance

Professor Lee Bollinger argues that "the free speech principle involves a special act of carving out one area of social interaction for extraordinary self-restraint, the purpose of which is to develop and demonstrate a social capacity to control feelings evoked by a host of social encounters." Bollinger argues that tolerance is a desirable value, if not essential. However, critics argue that society should be concerned by those who directly deny or advocate, for example, genocide (see Limitations on freedom of speech).


The notion of freedom of expression is intimately linked to political debate and the concept of democracy. The norms on limiting freedom of expression mean that public debate may not be completely suppressed even in times of emergency. One of the most notable proponents of the link between freedom of speech and democracy is Alexander Meiklejohn. He argues that the concept of democracy is that of self-government by the people. For such a system to work an informed electorate is necessary.








The Freedom Of Speech Network is owned and operated by The Promised Land Community Church. It's comprised of an ever growing private collection of biblical and political topic web sites aimed at proving our First Amendment right to Free Speech and Religious Assembly.  Our mission is clearly defined and can be seen on our web site God Save The Church.





The Truth About: The Bible, God, Jesus Christ, And Saving Your Soul.



Click Here
To A
sk God
One Question

Looking for a
good morning prayer?
Try this one.





Click Here To Shop Our
Exclusive & Patriotic Products



Luna Tech Web
Privacy Policy

  Search For More Sites On This Subject Below
Custom Search