“Civil libertarians must often remind government officials (and others) that if the First Amendment only protected the expression of popular and agreeable ideas, it would be totally unnecessary since those ideas would never be threatened by our democratic form of government. Our society's commitment to free speech is tested when we encounter the expression of ideas that are disagreeable -- or even offensive.”

i would ask to use this quote, on a large political site...??

The popular expressions of death panels, life itself being illegal without the appropriate insurance tax on it, compelled compliance, license, victimless crimes, larceny with impunity, funny money for the enslavement of the many by the few, and all actions taken to deny inalienable rights is very disagreeable, even offensive to me. The inalienable right addressed by the First Amendment is more than a 'civil liberty' it is a right of being. Mr. Lynch's democratic form of government does not comprehend unalienable rights endowed by man's creator or a government of law (being antithetical to his democratic form of government - that being, man is god with ability to make law).

Thus, as abhorrent as it is, there are people that will burn our flag and it is protected by our First Amendment. Now That is Offensive!

Flag burning is not offensive... not compared to acts such as denying basic life, liberty & pursuit of happyness to little children (e.g. voting against CHIP and against universal single payer health care)... those are the truly offensive acts because the cause true harm, something the burning of a symbolic piece of cloth has never done.

'A' from Reston, I may be with you on this one. Harm is truly committed against individuals when the free expression of ideas is supplanted with universal enslavement, forced inferior health care, single payer theft of labor and property, grossly inflated industry costs, and all other truly offensive acts set forth in the unconstitutional nation establishment of religion's canons. (I can give you Bouvier's law dictionary and Webster's definitions of religion again if you like and, how they are here relevant)

A very good quote.

There exists in this day, lamentably, an immense population of persons(many of whom are morbidly attracted to government "service")who are nurturing the fundamentally illusive notion that freedom of expression is a right such as
ought to be, entirely exclusively, theirs to exercise.

It is not that they do not believe in the right of freedom of expression, it is that they believe that it is only they who have a right to freely express themselves.

Our societies commitment to Free speech is well tested, considering the infiltration of Socialism has grown so deep and entrenched itself from local to federal levels. Natural laws of cause and effect are in play. There is always a breaking point. Ask our Founding Fathers !! For those who reside in other countries from a lofty position, sentiment can be misunderstood ! Let our sternness be coupled with Compassion. That would apply to all High positions in the USA.

Whatever happened to "sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me?" Do teachers tell their crying students that any more? They did in my day.