Vi_Veri_Veniversum_Vivus_Vici's blog

meos mihi linquite mores. Ubi dubium ibi libertas. Ultimo, ultra posse nemo obligatur. Homo nudus cum nuda iacebat , hic et nunc, homines libenter quod volunt credunt.

Oblitus sum perpolire clepsydras!!

The question is, “Are the rights of conscience alienable, or inalienable?”

The word conscience signifies common science, a court of judicature which the Almighty has erected in every human breast; a censor morum over all his actions. Conscience will ever judge right when it is rightly informed, and speak the truth when it understands it. But to advert to the question — “Does a man upon entering into social compact surrender his conscience to that society to be controled by the laws thereof, or can he in justice assist in making laws to bind his children’s consciences before they are born?”.

http://classicliberal.tripod.com/misc/conscience.html
The Rights of Conscience Inalienable;
and therefore Religious Opinions not cognizable by Law:
Or, The high-flying Churchman, stript of his legal Robe,
appears a Yahoo
John Leland (1791)

------------------------------------------

When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything—you can't conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.

Robert Anson Heinlein
"If This Goes On—", Revolt in 2100

------------------------------------------

As a matter of constitutional tradition, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we presume that governmental regulation of the content of speech is more likely to interfere with the free exchange of ideas than to encourage it. The interest in encouraging freedom of expression in a democratic society outweighs any theoretical but unproven benefit of censorship.

U.S. Supreme Court
1997, Janet Reno et al. v. ACLU et al.