‘Freedom for the thought we hate,’ revisited again – The Boston Globe

Despite the groups repulsive beliefs, Patriot Front has a constitutional right to march peacefully on the streets of Boston. Any assault should be prosecuted. The frenzied reaction to Patriot Fronts appearance, however, especially US Attorney Rachael Rollinss pledge that she will be thinking strategically about how were going to combat this, so that communities feel safe, suggests a veiled wish to limit the groups First Amendment rights (Police say they had no word on march, Page A1, July 6).

The same First Amendment that guarantees Patriot Fronts right to march in Boston, with no advance notice given, has also protected the rights to public demonstration of the many groups that have led the civil rights movement. And, to the chagrin of some, Black Lives Matter proponents can march in Mississippi, antifa members can march anywhere, and neo-Nazis can still march in Skokie, Ill. provided, of course, that they all remain peaceful.

As famously stated by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., the First Amendment guarantees freedom for the thought that we hate, not freedom from the thought that we hate. Our constitutional freedom of speech is tough stuff. I fear that too many Americans either are ignorant of its mandate or lack the stomach to endure the existence of views they despise.

Kenneth N. Margolin

Newton

The writer is a retired attorney.

See more here:
'Freedom for the thought we hate,' revisited again - The Boston Globe