🚀 go-pugleaf

(My background on this issue, so that you know where I'm coming from: I find
Andrew Dice Clay's "humor" both offensive and not funny, but I don't care
enough about it to consider it worth my effort to protest comedy clubs where
he performs, simply because I have limited time for activism and offensive
comedians isn't near the top of my priority list.  Oh, and I'm a "Card
Carrying Member of the ACLU" too.  And of the NRA, for that matter.)

John Cooley implies in his posting that protesting a comedy club which chooses
to host Andrew Dice Clay is equivalent to an attack on the First Amendment. 
It is no such thing.

The protesters are exercising THEIR right to free speech by protesting Clay
and The Comedy Connection.  They are not asking the government to ban Clay's
performances or to shut down The Comedy Connection.  What they are doing is
trying to convince The Comedy Connection that enough people are offended by
Clay's brand of humor that hosting him will be bad for their business.

The right to free speech does not include the right for the costs associated
with that speech to be paid for by someone else.  Clay has a right to express
unpopular opinions, but he doesn't have a right to have The Comedy Connection
help him do so; whether or not they do is a question of business, not a
question of the First Amendment.

I've cross-posted this message to alt.society.civil-liberty and directed
followups there.

-- 
Jonathan Kamens | OpenVision Technologies, Inc. | jik@security.ov.com