Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
It might be a question of months and so not have directly influenced the adoption of the first amendment, and I know it was in the chaos of post revolutionary France, but wasn't Rousseau's Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man pretty much a precursor to the Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment?
I like to think these enlightened policies and pre- or post- constitutional legal and philosophical bases all came from the same vein of thinkers who conferred in these great discussions, privately and publicly, on an inter-continental level, so I might have to go back a bit to my readings, but from what I understand the two documents essentially grew from the same richly fertilized soil....
:D
|
Media Guy: The French Declaration was not a precursor. The opposite. One handy online source states:
"Many of the concepts introduced by the Declaration were from the principles and philosophies of the Age of Enlightenment. Addressing the social contract as established by John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau and stressing the importance of individualism within French society, the Declaration became the founding document of modern France. It borrowed heavily from the U.S. Declaration of Independence of 1776, and ironically its writer, Thomas Jefferson, was in France at the time of its adoption. He called it a "victory" for man. The document also laid the groundwork for the separation of powers as touted by Baron de Montesquieu, laying the groundwork for the constitution to come."
Read more: About the Declaration of the Rights of Man | eHow.com
http://www.ehow.com/about_4595914_de...#ixzz2AcPJiXyH
The US Bill of Rights, including the First Amendment were adopted by the House of Representatives on August 21, 1789.
The important difference, as I understand it, is this: The French declaration was a mere statement of principles, a broad announcement of political philosophy. In the United States, our Constitution is the fundamental organic law. At least since the principle was articulated in Marbury v. Madison, the courts may invalidate any law that violates the constitution even were it passed unanimously by each house of Congress and immediately signed into law by the President. Over time, French governments have toyed and adjusted what is and what isn't protected by simple laws, for example adding hate speech to a list of what is not protected expression. Similarly, in England, for something to be called "unconstitutional" does not mean that it can be invalidated by any legal institution, but merely that it's out of step with the traditions of the nation. We Americans invented the concept that when the fundamental rights of man as articulated in our constitution are violated, it is no law at all, and no one need obey it. That is fundamentally different from a statement of principles. The Bill of Rights is our ultimate and highest law. We elevate those fundamental principles protecting the individual above democracy. The First Amendment is fundamentally a contra-majorititarian charter. If all of society wishes the Nazi or Communist or Anarchist or Islamic Fundamentalist to shut up and go home, it is the duty of the courts to protect his right to speak, even if he is the only one to express his own very obnoxious opinion. That's what makes the US an innovator in this area.
Exceptions to Free Speech here? Yup. A small list of exceptions first articulated by the Supreme Court in Chaplinsky, and obscenity is among them. At least one State Supreme Court has held that freedom of speech, as the pioneers carried it into Oregon, contained no exception about obscenity. You will find a comprehensive collection of more than one hundred cases about this subject and my brief notes about their significance at
http://www.xxxlaw.com/cases/index.html
The very most important thing on that page is the quotation from a very famous judge at the top of the page, Judge Learned Hand. In 1947 he said that Liberty most importantly lies in the hearts of men, and that when it died there, no constitution or law could save it. I believe that to be true.
And that's why, for twelve years, whenever I've spoken to groups of Webmasters at each Internext and XBIX or Phoenix Forum show, I've always started by telling the group of adult webmasters that they are patriots on the forward edge of the battle area in defending fundamental freedoms in the United States.