After a humiliating experience in high school, Ray Comfort had sworn off public speaking forever. When he became a Christian, however, he knew the message of the gospel had to be shared.
July 22, 2024
-
↓ 25%
The Evidence Study Bible (Hardback)
Original price was: $39.99.$29.99Current price is: $29.99.
Police and city officials understand their obligation to protect the free speech rights of citizens.
Public streets and parks are considered to be “traditional public forums.” This is the classic place where citizens have always been permitted to share their beliefs and ideas with one another either verbally or through the distribution of literature.
In the case of Hague v. C.I.O., 307 U.S. 496 (1939), the United States Supreme Court held that citizens have a “guaranteed access” to streets, parks, and other “traditional public forum.” The privilege to use the streets and parks for communication of views may be regulated in the best interests of all, but it must not, under the guise of regulation, be abridged or denied. Mere inconvenience to the government will not outweigh free speech interests.
“All citizens have an absolute right to share their faith in the “traditional public forum” of streets and parks.”
The “traditional public forum” is the most protected place for Christian witnessing, street preaching, and tract distribution. All citizens have an absolute right to share their faith in the “traditional public forum” of streets and parks. This absolute right is subject only to limited controls in the interest of public safety and order; e.g., two parades cannot march down the same street at the same time so parade permits, if constitutionally granted, are permissible.
- It is important to note that controls for public safety and order may not be imposed for reasons such as potential littering, potential offense to other citizens, or attempts to silence some citizens while continuing to permit others to speak in the forum.
- In the case of Schneider v. State, 308 U.S. 147 (1939), the United States Supreme Court did not permit cities to forbid leaflet distribution in order to prevent littering. The objective of keeping the streets clean does not outweigh the right to distribute literature in public.
Amplification may be regulated by ordinances setting noise decibel levels under Kovacs v.
Cooper, 335 U.S. 77 (1949):
Christians are free to witness and distribute gospel tracts in public streets and parks. Christians are also free to preach, sing, or present dramatizations, which might collect a crowd as long as that crowd will not block pedestrian or vehicular traffic. Permits may sometimes be required for formal crowd generating activities but they must be available on a neutral basis to all who request them and must allow real communication to take place. In the case of Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U.S. 51 (1965), the United States Supreme Court held that public officials may not be given overly broad discretion to grant or deny permits or licenses.
First Amendment law also does not allow city police or officials to interfere with a citizen’s right of freedom of speech simply because that speech might offend a listener. These cases are particularly important:
- In the case of Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940), the United States Supreme Court held that speech may not be prohibited merely because it offends some listeners.
- Several other Supreme Court cases have also dealt with this issue of giving offense to other citizens, which is sometimes called the “Heckler’s Veto” and is not permitted.
- In the case of Cox v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536 (1965), the United States Supreme Court held that hecklers may not be allowed to veto a speaker’s right of free speech. Police must control a crowd rather than arrest the speaker in order to maintain order.
- A similar ruling that offensiveness is not a reason to limit free speech rights was made by the Supreme Court in the case of Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).
In America, citizens, police, and city officials are still held to the legal rights of free speech simply stated in the maxim: “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” That is still the law in these United States. It is also true that we may be offended by what others say but we must protect their constitutional right to say it.
Witnessing, “street preaching,” and distribution of free literature are constitutionally protected activities because they are the ways in which citizens have always exercised their rights of free speech.
Important Note: This summary does not constitute the giving of legal advice. For more information, contact: Christian Law Association (727-399-8300) and American Center for Law & Justice (800-296-4529).
Order The Evidence Study Bible today.
9.
Know Your Rights in Public Speaking