The argument presented in the link is not necessarily true. As a behavior becomes more socially accepted, criticism of it becomes less so.
A parallel can be found in abortion protesting. It used to be widespread and fairly common, then it became less popular after a few protests turned violent. Then the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act was passed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Access_to_Clinic_Entrances_Act), and it's now illegal to protest within a certain radius (100 feet?) of an abortion clinic, no matter how peacefully you do it.
A similar change happened during the presidential primaries, protestors were confined to "free-speech" zones, typically enclosed cages with barbed wire or concrete walls. Protests were allowed in the cages and forbidden elsewhere in the convention cities until the primaries were over.
I can't go along with any "The government will never take away your freedom to do X!" arguments as long as the government is ever-increasing in power.
I didn't read this one as "the government will never take away your freedom to do X" - I read it as "if Fred Phelps is still doing his thing, your freedom probably hasn't been taken away yet".
(And, yeah, not at all fond of 'free-speech zones'. And while I think some anti-abortion protesting went past 'expression' and into physical intimidation, I'm not at all convinced that the FoAtCEA is an improvement on the problem it was meant to fix.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
lederhosen) wrote2009-04-22 08:21 am
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
no subject
A parallel can be found in abortion protesting. It used to be widespread and fairly common, then it became less popular after a few protests turned violent. Then the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act was passed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_Access_to_Clinic_Entrances_Act), and it's now illegal to protest within a certain radius (100 feet?) of an abortion clinic, no matter how peacefully you do it.
A similar change happened during the presidential primaries, protestors were confined to "free-speech" zones, typically enclosed cages with barbed wire or concrete walls. Protests were allowed in the cages and forbidden elsewhere in the convention cities until the primaries were over.
I can't go along with any "The government will never take away your freedom to do X!" arguments as long as the government is ever-increasing in power.
no subject
(And, yeah, not at all fond of 'free-speech zones'. And while I think some anti-abortion protesting went past 'expression' and into physical intimidation, I'm not at all convinced that the FoAtCEA is an improvement on the problem it was meant to fix.)