Political Correctness, I have told folks, will be the death of this nation.
Discrimination against free speech, however, is something more than Political Correctness - it is a direct assault on liberty!
Apparently we have gotten to the point that business owners feel that they can dictate to the populace what the acceptable topics around their place of business can be. However, this topic has a fine line, because in the same breath, we must also remember that privately owned businesses should have the freedom to decide what kind of environment they wish to have for their stores.
At the Galleria Mall in Roseville, California, a youth pastor was arrested for talking about God to two willing listeners. Security interrupted the conversation, and then placed him under citizen's arrest, claiming that the charge was "trespassing." Agreeing to leave, in the hopes of avoiding any trouble despite what he thought to be a ridiculous nature of the confrontation, the youth pastor prepared to walk away, but the guards grabbed him, shoved him against a storefront window, and handcuffed him tightly enough to draw blood. He was later taken to the police station where he was booked on charges of battery and trespassing.
The Pacific Justice Institute took the mall to court where a judge upheld the mall's regulations that basically says the mall owners can arrest patrons for engaging in casual conversations if the subject matter is considered to be political or religious in nature by security. An appeal was filed, and the case now has moved to the appellate courts. Pacific Justice Institute is pursuing the case on the grounds that the man's free speech was violated, and the appeal is now with the 3rd Appellate District in Sacramento.
Attorney Matthew McReynolds says of the case, "While a 'don't talk to strangers' rule may be good for kids, enforcing it against adults is absurd, and we think it violates California's free speech guarantees."
While challenging the discriminatory nature of the mall's restrictions in regards to free speech, the Pacific Justice Institute's President, Brad Dacus, says this case is about more than just a conversation about God. "Singling out religious speech for punishment violates our most basic principles of free expression. If anyone can be arrested for wearing a Christian T-shirt or mentioning God in a shopping mall, we have lost not only our freedom, but our sanity as a society."
Pacific Justice Institute's affiliate attorney Timothy Smith adds, "While reasonable regulations certainly are allowed, such as volume limits, targeting speech for banishment because of its subject is not. What they cannot do and did in this case [is target] political and religious speech. They originally chose to arrest the youth pastor for striking up a casual conversation. Since then, they've dug in their heels and are standing firm in their belief they can do whatever they want."
The mall's regulations, besides disallowing commercial speech and speech about religion or politics, also include an exception for those subjects if a speaker knew the other person previously. In other words, under the exemption, the plaintiff would have been allowed to have the same conversation in the same exact place if only he had previously met the people with whom he was speaking.
Such limitations on political or religious speech are exactly why the founding fathers encouraged free speech. The idea that anyone can regulate someone's speech without first examining and approving of it is insane. If, however, a private business owner does want to limit speech inside his or her place of business, the law may very well provide for that. If so, the question then arises regarding where the line should be drawn. Will it be so restrictive that a crucifix on a necklace won't be allowed?
The security went too far with the arrest, and violent treatment of the youth pastor, I believe. If the religious speech was disruptive enough to warrant security to enforce the mall's rules, wouldn't it have been more prudent to simply ask the folks to take the discussion outside, or something like that?
Perhaps they believed their treatment was warranted because, according to the Pacific Justice Institute, the youth pastor originally was confronted during a casual conversation with two other shoppers about faith when a store listened to the conversation and alerted mall security guards.
The owner of the mall, Westfield, owns 55 centers across the United States and is the world's largest listed retail property group by equity.
The mall also bans any clothing with religious or political messages.
One also wonders if the same actions would have been taken if three Muslims were talking about Allah in the mall, or if a couple folks were discussing what they believed to be the importance of a liberal agenda like the gay rights movement, or the abortion lobby.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Mall to Christians: God talk banned! - World Net Daily
No comments:
Post a Comment