5 ms·

But it is valid. “Congress shall make no law …” is actionable, and lets you challenge things in court. “Human dignity is inviolable” is a platitude. What can be

But it is valid. “Congress shall make no law …” is actionable, and lets you challenge things in court. “Human dignity is inviolable” is a platitude. What can be done with it?

disgu 5y ago
But there are laws restricting the 1st Amendment in the US.
- hirundo 5y ago
  There are court decisions defining the scope of the 1st Amendment. There are no valid laws restricting it, since the 1st Amendment is in the Constitution and no law can supersede the constitution. Such laws that are written and passed are unconstitutional. Edit: The above is mistaken. A law can restrict the 1st Amendment, or any other, if it survives "strict scrutiny": Although "strict scrutiny leaves few survivors" and will usually strike down such laws when strict scrutiny is found to apply, "the government must show that there is a compelling, or very strong, interest in law, and that the law is either narrowly tailored or is the least restrictive means available to the government." https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1966/strict-scrutiny https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1966/strict-scrutin...
  - disgu 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
  - viro 5y ago
    Umm instead of wasting time here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions#Counterfeit_currency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce... as you can see a couple of those are laws like CP and "Threatening the president"
  - q-big 5y ago
    > There are no valid laws restricting [the scope of the 1st Amendment] Copyright laws do that.
    - ionicgiraffe 5y ago
      They do. I have seen news in Europe where they cannot reproduce the original excerpt (reading aloud instead) of some communication because of copyright laws and the original excerpt belonged to a competing media corporation that had won previous such cases in court.
- viro 5y ago
  Like what? I have a feeling there aren't as many as you think. Most of them are about ordering people to commit literal violence/crimes.
  - disgu 5y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce... There you have a bunch of examples. Free speech in the US is restricted. That's the point I was making. You can be okay with the restrictions in place but you cannot ignore that they're there. That's just factually wrong.
  - BeefWellington 5y ago
    In a roundabout way libel and slander laws are a violation of the first amendment. They're civil actions but it's the government through the courts that finds you guilty and imposes punishments, seizing assets, etc. It's very hard to win cases on those things as the judiciary does its best to still make it work within the structure of the constitution but it does nonetheless restrict my ability to say "viro eats kittens" without possible penalty imposed by the government.
q-big 5y ago
> “Human dignity is inviolable” is a platitude. What can be done with it? This is the first sentence of the "Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland" (Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany): > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_for_the_Federal_Republic_of_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_for_the_Federal_Repu... Absatz 1 (paragraph 1) (see https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/BJNR000010949.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/BJNR000010949.html): > (1) Die Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar. Sie zu achten und zu schützen ist Verpflichtung aller staatlichen Gewalt. > (1) Human dignity is inviolable. It is the duty of all state authorities [remark: "Gewalt" literally means "violence" in English] to respect and protect it.
- ionicgiraffe 5y ago
  In fact, I wanted to say that such concepts in laws that direct how other laws are made need be necessarily broad. If you think of it: freedom, dignity, citizenship, and so on, are not to be interpreted in absolute terms according to some official definition. The motivation for the law is fundamental, and concepts get narrowed down in laws of lower rank until the point at which they cannot be listed case by case, then interpretation by the judicial system enters into account, e.g., is the insult "f*g idiot" within the protected freedom of speech?
croes 5y ago
"Human dignity is inviolable" is the reason why Germany has no death penalty. So it's a lot.

But it is valid. “Congress shall make no law …” is actionable, and lets you challenge things in court. “Human dignity is inviolable” is a platitude. What can be done with it?

disgu 5y ago

But there are laws restricting the 1st Amendment in the US.

hirundo 5y ago
There are court decisions defining the scope of the 1st Amendment. There are no valid laws restricting it, since the 1st Amendment is in the Constitution and no law can supersede the constitution. Such laws that are written and passed are unconstitutional. Edit: The above is mistaken. A law can restrict the 1st Amendment, or any other, if it survives "strict scrutiny": Although "strict scrutiny leaves few survivors" and will usually strike down such laws when strict scrutiny is found to apply, "the government must show that there is a compelling, or very strong, interest in law, and that the law is either narrowly tailored or is the least restrictive means available to the government." https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1966/strict-scrutiny https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1966/strict-scrutin...
- disgu 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
- viro 5y ago
  Umm instead of wasting time here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions#Counterfeit_currency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce... as you can see a couple of those are laws like CP and "Threatening the president"
- q-big 5y ago
  > There are no valid laws restricting [the scope of the 1st Amendment] Copyright laws do that.
  - ionicgiraffe 5y ago
    They do. I have seen news in Europe where they cannot reproduce the original excerpt (reading aloud instead) of some communication because of copyright laws and the original excerpt belonged to a competing media corporation that had won previous such cases in court.
viro 5y ago
Like what? I have a feeling there aren't as many as you think. Most of them are about ordering people to commit literal violence/crimes.
- disgu 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce... There you have a bunch of examples. Free speech in the US is restricted. That's the point I was making. You can be okay with the restrictions in place but you cannot ignore that they're there. That's just factually wrong.
- BeefWellington 5y ago
  In a roundabout way libel and slander laws are a violation of the first amendment. They're civil actions but it's the government through the courts that finds you guilty and imposes punishments, seizing assets, etc. It's very hard to win cases on those things as the judiciary does its best to still make it work within the structure of the constitution but it does nonetheless restrict my ability to say "viro eats kittens" without possible penalty imposed by the government.

q-big 5y ago

> “Human dignity is inviolable” is a platitude. What can be done with it? This is the first sentence of the "Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland" (Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany): > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_for_the_Federal_Republic_of_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_for_the_Federal_Repu... Absatz 1 (paragraph 1) (see https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/BJNR000010949.html https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/BJNR000010949.html): > (1) Die Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar. Sie zu achten und zu schützen ist Verpflichtung aller staatlichen Gewalt. > (1) Human dignity is inviolable. It is the duty of all state authorities [remark: "Gewalt" literally means "violence" in English] to respect and protect it.

ionicgiraffe 5y ago
In fact, I wanted to say that such concepts in laws that direct how other laws are made need be necessarily broad. If you think of it: freedom, dignity, citizenship, and so on, are not to be interpreted in absolute terms according to some official definition. The motivation for the law is fundamental, and concepts get narrowed down in laws of lower rank until the point at which they cannot be listed case by case, then interpretation by the judicial system enters into account, e.g., is the insult "f*g idiot" within the protected freedom of speech?

croes 5y ago

"Human dignity is inviolable" is the reason why Germany has no death penalty. So it's a lot.