It seems to be, as we listen to constant news media assertions, abetted by a panoply of special pleaders, that freedom of the press is the preeminent right protected by the First Amendment. But the First Amendment is about rights more important than just freedom of the press.
Today’s First Amendment (A-1) was not originally the first of 12 amendments proposed for our first United States Congress to consider as changes needed to improve the new Constitution; nor was freedom of the press its first concern.
Ten of these amendments — the Bill of Rights — were adopted on Dec. 15, 1791. Let’s look at A-1, or at least four of the six rights protected thereby, to see what it says and what it means.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” — this means the national state cannot tell us what to think, especially in matters of piety.
This right is often called “freedom of conscience.” Then, A-1 says, “or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” which means we are free to worship any way we want by following our own conscience, also called our own free will. But these two clauses also highlight and intensify the still unresolved structural conflict between nationalism and state’s rights.
Next comes “or abridging the freedom of speech,” which means censorship is out. Thus, once we have figured out what our inner soul (conscience) tells us is the true path to happiness, the federal government (the Bill of Rights hadn’t yet been extended to other levels of government) cannot stop us from telling everyone else what bees are buzzing in our bonnets.
The above three freedoms are largely individual and personal; now comes the collective and corporate right “or of the press …”
There is a logical and purposeful progression here. Without freedom of conscience and the unfettered ability to express the insights gained therefrom, freedom of the press is nugatory.
Paul M. Craig
Northampton