Is the purpose of free speech to assure info vital to life is shared and understood?

Oops, you've got the thread title which is about the biological purpose of free speech confused with the purpose of the constitution.

And the term "psychological
right" is very poorly applied. In fact it seems altogether misplaced.

We have control over government when we are unified to exercise that control. We have laws which the government must follow that maintain that structure. Mostly the law of the land limits government power over us.

The point is that government must, in order for the right to alter or abolish to be real, empower speech informing state citizens about destruction of unalienable rights, AND empower speech specifically related to creating the unity needed to alter or abolish.

All that is just logical.

All speech is free, but all speech is not equal.

Speech which informs one another of the destruction of unalienable rights has high priority generally and speech based in elements needed for unity required to alter or abolish must be promoted by government.

All of that is justifiably logical IF the right to alter or abolish is going to be real.

Aside from that, what George Washington said is logical too.

 

I voted for answer # 1 in the poll; however, the idea has become little more than hypocrisy.

 

As the purpose is tested, it may seem that way to some who are not focused on the ultimate purpose, but afterwards, IF it succeeds, it will be always be widely appreciated, celebrated and reinforced as to its function.

Currently, it does not serve its purpose consistently or widely as the powerful have co-opted it for avarice and will assert that such is its purpose as it is in their interest now.

 

The constitutional purpose of free speech is so that people can express their decent in an open forum and so that people can unify for a common cause.

 

I think that is so, but only inclusively as part and parcel of our right to express ourselves, our feelings and opinions. The right to free speech is primarily to be seen as a right to an artistic type of expression in the widest possible sense, so art can include documentation, education, dissent, etc.

There is no "constitutional purpose" to free expression, rather, free expression is the purpose of the Constitution.

 

Another more fundamental way, more important way to state this is defense of unalienable rights which are defined by the DOI, which carries the intent used in the constitution, and we hold that in common.

All speech is free, but not all speech is equal. That speech which informs of the destruction of unalienable rights and unifys to protect them is justifiably the most important speech, and the ultimate PURPOSE of speech logically and reasonably under American law.

Dissent is not mentioned anywhere, but unalieinable rights are, along with the right to alter or abolish government destructive to them. Article V is the law of the constitution to alter or abolish government in an orderly fashion.

Wanna see how stupid the argument against this can get?

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=370271&page=9&p=1066781453#post1066781453

The MF'in POS COMPLETLY evades explaining the method we shall use to unify in order to effectively alter or abolish IF free speech is not to serve that purpose. Like 6 times now!

 

When we are disconnected from the business of survival, we start to imagine that 'happiness' has the same value. The simplest subsistence farmer, working the dry earth of some dirt poor country, would laugh in your face if you were to suggest that 'happiness' is the ultimate goal.

Anyone who regards survival as 'difficult to discern' has problems of a magnitude which should put them outside consideration.

 

Again, you spout off about what you know not, I have been friends with such farmers and had really good food and shared drinks of really good Rum from My jug, and a few smokes.

These People were really happy, and I helped them make some money, they had a Grove of tangerine trees that produced the best tasting fruit, problem was getting the fruit to market as well as some other choice fruit.

Once money started rolling in, they were pretty happy, they were a happy sort to start with, Mateo always had good words for me, he always reminded me of Jed Clampett of the Beverly Hillbillies, very soft spoken and polite.