Γιώργος Σαράφογλου

Πάλι η μπάλα στην εξέδρα με τις αφίσες που αναρτήθηκαν και μετά την κατακραυγή “ευαισθητοποιημένων” πολιτών κατέβηκαν.

Πολλοί είπαν ότι η αφίσες θίγουν ένα θέμα το οποίο δια νόμου έληξε το 1986. Και; Τι πάει να πει έληξε; Δηλαδή απαγορεύεται να μιλάμε γι’ αυτό; Δεν κατάλαβα. Πού είναι η ελευθερία της εκφραζόμενης γνώμης, της άλλης άποψης;

Το ίδιο ακριβώς πρόβλημα με τις αφίσες σε τραίνα και άλλα δημόσια μεταφορικά μέσα έχει συμβεί πολλές φορές στο παρελθόν εδώ στην Αμερική.

Το 2006 στο San Francisco η Ρωμαιοκαθολική εκκλησία έβαλε Pro-Life διαφημίσεις στα Μέσα Μεταφοράς BART(Bay Area Rapid Transit).

Το θέμα εκεί έληξε με την BART να αφήνει τις Pro-Life διαφημίσεις ως είχαν διότι η Πρώτη Τροποποίηση του Συντάγματος (First Amendment of the Constitution) εγγυάται την ουδετερότητα της άποψης/γνώμης. Δεν μπορεί να απαγορεύσει την έκφραση μιας ιδέας επειδή είναι προσβλητική ή δεν συμφωνεί μαζί της.

Το ίδιο έπρεπε να ισχύσει κι εδώ.

Θα παραθέσω εδώ την περίπτωση του San Francisco για όποιον θέλει να την διαβάσει, μόνο που είναι στα αγγλικά.

Ο Βολταίρος είχε πει “Διαφωνώ με αυτό που λες, αλλά θα υπερασπιστώ μέχρι θανάτου το δικαίωμα σου να το λες”!

A Roman Catholic group in Northern California has recently begun running a series of ads in dozens of San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) subway trains and stations. The ads criticize Roe v. Wade and ask: “Abortion: Have we gone too far?” They also contain specific anti-abortion arguments, such as this one: “The Supreme Court says you can choose: after the heart starts beating, after its arms and legs appear, after all organs are present, after the sex is apparent, after it sucks its thumb, after it responds to sounds, after it could survive outside the womb.”

Unsurprisingly, pro-abortion-rights groups are concerned about the ad campaign. Many activists have taken to defacing or destroying the posters. Indeed, the ads’ backers have already exhausted their supply of replacements, and have had to order many additional prints. Some pro-Roe advocates blame BART officials for permitting the ads. As one organizer put it: “[E]very woman has noticed them. I couldn’t believe BART would allow something like this. Why are they doing this?”

The answer for why BART posted the ads — and it is an answer that Americans all across the political spectrum should learn more about and cherish – is, in short, the First Amendment.

First Amendment 101 — Viewpoint Neutrality

First Amendment law here is very clear: Government (including government-operated transit authorities such as BART) cannot constitutionally reject or suppress messages because public officials (or the constituents those officials represent) dispute or are offended by the ideas being expressed.

Numerous cases and constitutional history teach that the most basic command of the First Amendment is viewpoint neutrality in the regulation or promotion of political speech; government may not discriminate against or in favor of any particular political message or point of view. As Justice William Brennan wrote for the Supreme Court over fifteen years ago in one of the famous cases involving prohibitions on flag burning, “[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because it finds the idea offensive or disagreeable.”

For this reason, once BART had opened up its stations and its trains for other kinds of political ads, concerning a whole range of contested public policy questions, BART surely could not have rejected the Catholic organization’s ads on the basis of their message.

Το άρθρο απηχεί τις απόψεις του συντάκτη του.  

The article expresses the views of the author

iPorta.gr