edition Act says anyone opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States could be imprisoned for up to two years. It was also illegal to write, print, utter, or publish anything critical of the president or Congress."[1]

Though not an official law until 1798, the revolutionists, crying all the w

During the birth pangs of America in Colonial times, the idea of freedom of speech was the definitive rallying cry of the soon-to-be Americans. However, I would suggest for your thinking that the hypocritical conditions under which the idea of the so-called freedom of speech was heralded still exist today. American wannebees back then did not care nor understand freedom of speech. Neither do they today.

To the colonists, freedom of speech was a device. It was an ideological tool to achieve a goal. It was not an ideology to be embraced for its own sake. It was not something to be cherished, sought for, or to die for as is the goal for humans to be truly free human beings in the pursuit of happiness. They did not seek it as an end in and of itself.

During the fight for independence, colonists actively sought out and persecuted those with dissenting views. They destroyed the printing presses of those who supported the British government's position. They prosecuted those who supported the British ideology. No one was allowed to entertain the idea that perhaps the colonists were wrong and the Crown was right. The colonists continued to punish those with a dissenting view even after independence was won.

It was through the Alien and Sedition Acts, officially recognized in 1798, by which a dissenter could be imprisoned for up to two years for offering a dissenting view.

"The Sedition Act says anyone opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States could be imprisoned for up to two years. It was also illegal to write, print, utter, or publish anything critical of the president or Congress."[1]

Though not an official law until 1798, the revolutionists, crying all the w

understand freedom of speech. Neither do they today.

To the colonists, freedom of speech was a device. It was an ideological tool to achieve a goal. It was not an ideology to be embraced for its own sake. It was not something to be cherished, sought for, or to die for as is the goal for humans to be truly free human beings in the pursuit of happiness. They did not seek it as an end in and of itself.

During the fight for independence, colonists actively sought out and persecuted those with dissenting views. They destroyed the printing presses of those who supported the British government's position. They prosecuted those who supported the British ideology. No one was allowed to entertain the idea that perhaps the colonists were wrong and the Crown was right. The colonists continued to punish those with a dissenting view even after independence was won.

It was through the Alien and Sedition Acts, officially recognized in 1798, by which a dissenter could be imprisoned for up to two years for offering a dissenting view.

"The Sedition Act says anyone opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States could be imprisoned for up to two years. It was also illegal to write, print, utter, or publish anything critical of the president or Congress."[1]

Though not an official law until 1798, the revolutionists, crying all the w

ness. They did not seek it as an end in and of itself.

During the fight for independence, colonists actively sought out and persecuted those with dissenting views. They destroyed the printing presses of those who supported the British government's position. They prosecuted those who supported the British ideology. No one was allowed to entertain the idea that perhaps the colonists were wrong and the Crown was right. The colonists continued to punish those with a dissenting view even after independence was won.

It was through the Alien and Sedition Acts, officially recognized in 1798, by which a dissenter could be imprisoned for up to two years for offering a dissenting view.

"The Sedition Act says anyone opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States could be imprisoned for up to two years. It was also illegal to write, print, utter, or publish anything critical of the president or Congress."[1]

Though not an official law until 1798, the revolutionists, crying all the w

the idea that perhaps the colonists were wrong and the Crown was right. The colonists continued to punish those with a dissenting view even after independence was won.

It was through the Alien and Sedition Acts, officially recognized in 1798, by which a dissenter could be imprisoned for up to two years for offering a dissenting view.

"The Sedition Act says anyone opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States could be imprisoned for up to two years. It was also illegal to write, print, utter, or publish anything critical of the president or Congress."[1]

Though not an official law until 1798, the revolutionists, crying all the w

edition Act says anyone opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States could be imprisoned for up to two years. It was also illegal to write, print, utter, or publish anything critical of the president or Congress."[1]

Though not an official law until 1798, the revolutionists, crying all the while, "freedom of speech," actively suppressed and punished anyone who held a dissenting view. Later, it actually became a law, thus preventing anyone from criticizing the President and or Congress.

Freedom of Speech? Oh, really?

Benjamin Franklin's own brother, who was persecuted by the British government for printing dissenting views, pre-revolution, declared himself completely comfortable, post-revolution, with prosecuting those with a dissenting view or those who held different ideas.

Freedom of Speech, to the colonists, pre- and post-revolution, evidently only applied to those who agreed with their ideas. Anyone else, anyone with a different idea, or anyone who dissented from the majority could be, and was indeed, legally prosecuted.

Oh, you say, that was then and certainly it goes on no longer. Really?

Try this little experiment:

If you are a public school teacher, try making your dissenting view concerning the origins of homosexuality known. Try making your position that you believe homosexuality is a choice and not intrinsic public. Try telling others that gays are made, not born and see what happens.

At the very least you will be forced, in order to keep your job, into psychiatric therapy to be readjusted. Or, you will lose your employment.

A dissenting view would not be and is not tolerated.

If you have children in public schools,