David Draiman Quotes

Inconvenience does not absolve the government of its obligation to tolerate speech

I'm as keen as the next person to preserve the right to free speech.

An unconditional right to say what one pleases about public affairs is what I consider to be the minimum guarantee of the 1st Amendment.

As an active privilege, it [freedom of speech] ranks with the privilege of committing murder; we may exercise it if we are willing to take the consequences.

Political speech is indispensable to decision-making in a democracy, and this is no less true because the speech comes from a corporation. By taking the right to speak from some and giving it to others, the Government deprives the disadvantaged person or class of the right to use speech to strive to establish worth, standing, and respect for the speaker’s voice. The Government may not by these means deprive the public of the right and privilege to determine for itself what speech and speakers are worthy of consideration. The First Amendment protects speech and speaker, and the ideas that flow from each.

You cannot prevent me from talking. I am exercising my right to free speech.

The Founding Fathers' instructions were clear: The right to free speech includes bad speech; it means tolerance of ideas that many find obnoxious.

The right to free speech is critical to our democracy.

Think about it: If you were publicly branded a racist on an issue of public debate, might you not next time hesitate to speak out, write your elected representatives or go to a meeting? That's a chilling effect - and undermines the First Amendment.

I don't want our right to be able to speak and dissent to be taken away.

Individuals have a right to freedom of speech.

Free speech is the cornerstone to every right we have.

Criticism of government finds sanctuary in several portions of the 1st Amendment. It is part of the right of free speech. It embraces freedom of the press.

If Thomas Jefferson had heard us, he probably would have said, 'We shouldn't have free speech.'

In America you can say anything you want - as long as it doesn't have any effect.

Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection.

People have a right to criticize.

Chinese citizens have never had the right to really express their opinions; in the constitution it says you can, but in the real world it is more dangerous. In the west people think it's a right they're born with. Here it's a right given by the government, and one that's not really practised.

The 1st Amendment protects the right to speak, not the right to spend.

If government were free to suppress disfavored speech by preventing potential speakers from being paid, there would not be much left of the 1st Amendment.

Fear of serious injury alone cannot justify suppression of free speech and assembly.

[E]rroneous statement … must be protected if the freedoms of expression are to be given the breathing space that they need ... to survive.

The government may not prohibit expression simply because it disagrees with its message.

Our natural, God-given right of free-speech, though constitutionally recognized as sacred in every part of the country, can be exercised in the slaveholding States only at the peril of our lives. Slavery cannot bear one ray of light, or the slightest criticism.

The rights of free speech and free press do not carry with them the right to advocate the right to advocate the destruction of the very government that protects the freedom of an individual to express his views.