#Nine Passengers

[H2O Man]

54. Well said!

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

In the OP, I was not speaking of "free speech," of course. Rather, the right to peacefully assemble to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The two are obviously very closely related, and thus your examples can be applied.

If those engaged in a protest rally are doing so violently, they should be arrested. I think everyone here agrees with this.

If they are doing so peacefully, those advocating for arrests are of the ilk that Martin Luther King, Jr., encountered. I don't think this community has any of that type.

If they are doing so peacefully, one can indeed say they are idiots. Let's say that they were protesting the torture of children by putting them in cages, as the last administration did. Republicans had every right to call those protesting idiots. I think that in doing so, those republicans helped define the stark differences in values between the two parties, something that surely helped us elect Joe Biden.

Then let's take a group protesting the torture of children in Gaza. Just for the heck of it, let's consider a huge, peaceful one that took place in Boston, since I'm familiar with it. Surely free speech allows for non-participants watching coverage on the news to call them idiots. No question there. Likewise, I have the right to say that those calling the crowd "idiots" are short-sighted. But with that -- at least for me -- comes the obligation to explain why I think they are making an error.

I'd start with the title of Lennon's 1974 album, "Walls & Bridges." Does it benefit the party in 2024 to build a wall between us and young people out exercising Amendment 1 rights? Now, some here might say, "We aren't putting them in cages, just building a wall to protect ourselves from listeing to them." I understandthat this is where some people's minds are at. I know they are wrong, but I don't think that makes them idiots, for we are all wrong sometimes, especially when emotions block rational thought.

A lot of the protest participants in Boston were young members of the Democratic Party. They wee not saying they will not vote for President Biden. Rather, if one took the time to lsten to what they were saying, instead of risking actually being an idiot that assumes that media reports on what they were saying were accurate, there are benefits to be accrued. Let me give but one example: my daughter was one of those in that protest rally, opposed to the torture of children. She is a Democrat. She used to work for the MA Attorney General. She currently is coordinating with the state's secretary of education on programs for "at risk" youth. She travels this country, helping set up such programs, even in red states. She used to work on immigration at a law firm, and taught part time at Boston College. I am not fully objective, but I thinkshe's the type of young Democrat that helps the party. I recognize others have a right to call her an "idiot" for engaging in a protest.

She knows that protest attracted some who will never vote for President Biden or any Democrat. And that there are also independents, who might or might not vote for Biden. And possibly some Democrats who are undecided. She also remembers my lesson we called "Politics 101" from when she was a little girl, out campaigning for Democratic Party candidates. There are three groups: A, who will always vote for you; B, who will always vote4 against you; and C, the "undecideds" who decide every election. Thus, she works patiently, to encourage Group C from those rallies to vote for President Biden.