I do not subscribe to this idea that we must limit speech in order to preserve free speech. While much of the arguments for this philosophy sound good on the s

I do not subscribe to this idea that we must limit speech in order to preserve free speech. While much of the arguments for this philosophy sound good on the surface it is very much the slippery slope. The advent of the radio and other broadcast communication mechanisms caused this same stir and is part of the reason why we have the FCC. This kind of thought process translates our freedom of speech into freedom to listen. someone else is deciding the speakers and what they are free to speak about thus controlling the conversation. Once the conversation becomes one sided you don't know what you're missing. The first amendment to the United States Constitution that seems very direct in its wording and that's often what people refer to but I much prefer the wording in the United Nations universal declaration of human Rights article 19. "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; 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."