|
"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 Act.com) 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.
ON THE BATTLEFIELD FOR THE LORD!
Addison B. Bachman
Preacher
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).
Democracy
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.
|
|
