Free speech is a commonly discussed topic these days. Seems like you cannot trip over the paper on the front porch without seeing some headline concerning it.

But I think lately it is also terribly misunderstood.

The idea was awesome I have to admit. The First amendment to the Constitution says:

There it is, clear as day. Congress shall make no law….abridging the freedom of speech. So then how did it become so twisted and meaningless?

First, near as I can tell, the current ideas of free speech are a myth. What the 1st amendment says is that "Congress shall not…" there is no specific restrictions on states, schools, cities, local communities or any other manner of organization, yet most of those places are where most cases come up. The concept was intended to prevent the Federal Government from being tyrannical. What we have instead is every special interest group in the world clamoring for attention, and demanding to have their speech be free, while restricting everyone else’s. Sure, it is probably a very good thing that so many states and other other governing bodies try to follow it in spirit, but all that aside, the constitution seems to protect against federal restriction primarily.

And not only that, but suddenly the idea has become extended to not just speech, but expression, so not only is speech protected, but so apparently is graffiti, porn, obscene art and nameless other actions.

But let’s say I am way off base with my thinking that free speech was intended as a federal measure. Even if we accept the modern interpretations, there are so many controls and restrictions and exceptions, that it might as well not exist, and I am not talking about the "yelling fire in a movie theater" example.

Here lately we are seeing all manner of wild tangents: