|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
State of the Union — Freedom of Speech, Sanctity of Marriage Paul Weyrich Last Friday we held our Conservative State of the Union forum, the continuation of a successful series of broadcast and usually telecast panel discussions. It draws a big response. Many people appreciate that the Free Congress Foundation puts forth a conservative viewpoint independent of Congress and the White House. People may disagree with this or that policy of the Bush administration and of the last Congress. Many conservatives now realize that things could be worse given that the leadership of Congress is now in the hands of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid, D-Nev. As panel moderator I could not fully express my own views about the State of the Union. This column will provide that opportunity. There are two concerns that I would like to address. Freedom of speech is protected by the First Amendment. In my book, that means when you are discussing politics you can say what you want, when you want, and how you want without regulation. Politicians, political parties, and interest groups should be required to disclose their funding sources but they should not have federal government monitoring of what they say or placing requirements on when they can say it. The McCain-Feingold campaign legislation which limits the ability of political groups to name elected public officials in television advertising before a primary or general election is not "reform" in the positive sense of the word. Story Continues Below
It is a disturbing step backward from the First Amendment. The change in Congress has brought renewed calls to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. As I wrote last month, if this policy returns, it will mean radio stations and talk-radio hosts would be forced to provide balancing viewpoints to the issues they discuss. This isn't the American way. It's sour grapes for the liberals who push for reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine because they are not dominating talk radio in the same way they dominate the establishment media outlets such as National Public Radio, CNN, Bloomberg, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. The liberals even do well on Internet blogs. This drive to trample the rights of free speech deserves a strong counterreaction in defense of our First Amendment rights. Anyone who believes in individual rights should realize it is in the best interest to guarantee that radio talk-show hosts and interest groups, which include liberal groups such as the AFL-CIO, can speak as they choose, when they choose, without government interference. The First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech is a first principle of our country. It has distinguished our country from many others throughout history and continues to do so. Americans need to understand how the integrity of the First Amendment has been compromised by government-dictated efforts under the guise of "bipartisan reform" and stands to be diminished further in the drive to reinstate "fairness." The second issue is marriage. We need to preserve the traditional institution of marriage between a man and a woman. Much will continue to be said about that as the drive to extend marriage to other kinds of couplings will continue to be pushed unabated by the homosexual lobby. I've written often about how this drive to subvert the time-honored biblical definition of America must not be allowed to succeed. That threat continues. At the same time, we need to do more to assure that young people realize the benefits of marriage and the traditional family. Too many younger Americans have grown up in homes wrecked by divorce or absent parents. They have become gun-shy about marriage or simply believe it is unimportant. Americans need to realize children are the best guarantee that our society can continue to thrive economically and culturally. The entertainment and news media often deride the traditional family. Remember the criticism former Vice President Dan Quayle took when he criticized a television character, Murphy Brown, having become a single mother by choice? In less than a year, The Atlantic ran an article headlined, "Dan Quayle Was Right." So he was.
President George W. Bush and his administration have worked to promote marriage. It will take more, particularly from our religious institutions and the media. Many churches and synagogues need to promote the benefits of marriage and the importance of doing everything possible to maintain marriages intact. One good thing done by the news media is a tabloid, Express, issued by The Washington Post. Every week it features young couples who are engaged describing how they met. This concept should be expanded in publications aimed at married readers, featuring couples who experienced turbulence in their relationship, how they managed to stay together, and what benefits they and their children accrued from that important decision to stay united. A society that truly honors the institution of marriage as solely that of a commitment between a man and a woman will be blessed with stronger families, better able to surmount trying times, united by a strong bond of faith and love and tradition. Strong families surmount difficulties when circumstances are trying. The children of families are better able to thrive in school and in life. That means a stronger America. Those are my thoughts about the State of the Union 2007. We need to protect an endangered freedom — speech — and an endangered institution — the traditional concept of marriage. Both enabled America to become the country of freedom and opportunity that it is today. Lose both and we will definitely not be the same country.
Paul M. Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation. Editor's note:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2008 NewsMax.Com |