I visited the "Booker Rising" site the other day and read something posted by Star Parker. She was decrying the fate of our society and culture because a Minister was prohibited from "counseling", within the immediate environs, women entering an abortion clinic he had staked out.
Her attempt to connect this minister's activity with the economic bailout was lost on me, but I think I did understand and disagree with her reference to the applicability of the First Amendment- you know, the one about freedom of speech. She felt any limitation placed upon him was a violation of this primary Constitutional right, and presumably since it was aired where it was, her stance represented a conservative position. I may be a knot-head, but to me this seems like the all too frequent intellectual malapropism confusing conservatism and morality. And I don't think it does justice to the scholarly vigor applied to the interpretation of the concept of freedom of speech over the years.

If we had a one on one discussion Star and I would probably find ourselves mostly harmonious in our views on abortion itself, but would part company if I correctly understand her to be inferring that religiously motivated speech has "special privilege". Would this Minister have Constitutional sanction if he stood outside her house to "counsel" her if she was contemplating an abortion for herself or a daughter? Would it be acceptable for him to parade back and forth with a placard on the public thoroughfare in front of or near her residence denouncing any of her activities he considered immoral? Should he be allowed to harass people entering a bank to apply for a mortgage because of the Biblical condemnation of usury? Can and should his freedom of speech impinge on her or anyone's freedom of conscience? J.S. Mill said, "The principle of freedom cannot require he should be free not to be free. It is not freedom to alienate his freedom".

I would not suggest that dissent be outlawed or prevented: the amount expressed is already disproportionately low considering the imperfections of society. And I believe the Minister has the full and complete right to pronounce, publish, and disseminate his views on abortion or any other matter, but I also think it is entirely appropriate to allow a corridor of privacy for those engaged in personal, legal activities - from zealots or paparazzi.

It would be interesting to hear Star's view on the suppression of hecklers and protesters at military recruiting stations, to see if it comports with those she holds concerning Ministers at abortion clinics, and to determine if you can support one and abhor the other and still be properly conservative.