Which of these two constitutional rights is more valuable to you and which matters most?

Question

The free speech right of political protesters to assemble and protest or the free speech right of name-callers to counter-protest by rhetorically calling the protesters "whiners" and other kinds of derogatory names?
file reference:TWH 11242006

file reference correction 11242006-1

Q posed asks responders to discriminate between the rights and it is a cop out to not try to do so. Unsupported Assertions ,like derogatory namecalling, are not helpful to the discourse on ideas. Pls try to explain your answers.

Just How can a Q be ridiculous?

I think it is obvious that I am asking to choose? The rights are located in the same place, they must have something in common--that is true, but they also differ. I ask you to think about the difference by the way I posed the Q. If every thing is equally important then nothing is important because we can't (or we refuse to) say why something is more or less important. Please Try to Think harder.

My Q assumes nothing. It seems that many answerers like to make assumptions about the asker. Those assumptions are often personal projections read into the Q by some answerers since the Q asked says nothing about the asker.

Answer 1

You can't segregate the two, and know one should try. Nothing is more important to the citizens of this country than the Bill of Rights. However, some believe it is OK to take liberties in exchange for security, a concept that never works out for the citizens, and I disrespect people who agrees with it.

Answer 2

first of all you propose a situation in vacuum to reality, the fact is a person has privacy rights as well and when a Religious group attacks a private funeral of a soldier, the mourners need protection from outsiders...The right to free speech is very important but must be seen with all other rights to be realistic. You propose a question just like Rush, Coulter, Hannity, or O'Reilly would...in your own private context

Answer 3

You cant have one without the other. One should be able to say what he wishes as long as it causes no physical harm to another. On that same note, the person who doesnt like what the first person is saying has to be free to call him a jerk off without worrying about anyone getting all "offended"

Answer 4

Both are highly regulated. The key is right to assemble. What follows is subject to litigation.

Go big Red Go

Answer 5

Ridiculous question, since both rights come from the same place: The 1st Amendment.

EDIT: I've already answered your question about why this question is ridiculous: Both rights come from the same place and you are asking us to choose one over the other.

Answer 6

tough question but if I have to discern I would say the right to protest. there was a man you might be familiar with who once said' I disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it" That pretty much says it all.

Answer 7

You assume that all counter protest are derogatory while all protests are not. I find it disturbing that you would think that.

Answer 8

Both.

And not to put to fine a point on it, both sides are whiners.

Answer 9

They are the same constitutional right. what is your question?

Answer 10

THEY BOTH ARE EQUAL. DOSE IT HURT YOUR FEELINGS TO BE CALLED A WHINER. AND HOW BAD DO YOU WANT TO BAN THEM FROM CALLING YOU ONE.