Calls for bloggers to sign some sort of “civility code” are dangerous and inconsistent with the spirit of the blogosphere and Free Enterprise. While modern technology has created some problems, conservatives, especially, should be glad for the ability to communicate via blogs, talk radio, and cable TV. It wasn’t that long ago that conservative thought was, in many ways, censored by the mainstream media. So forgive us if we aren’t excited about the idea of relinquishing it — even voluntarily.
Shouldn’t the owner of the blog have “the right to refuse service”? Stifling speech, even if it is offensive to some, should not be allowed. I do my best to be civil to every visitor that comments, even though sometimes, it’s been difficult. That’s the way my parents raised me.
Of course, the code is meant to stop “abusive” speech. But who determines what is abusive? Is hard-ball politics abusive? Some believe it is — and that’s the fundamental problem — because political speech (even if it’s “negative”) must be protected at all cost (for the same reason, I oppose campaign finance reform).
Campaign finance reform was one of the biggest mistakes ever put on the books. Bush should have vetoed that sucker, but alas, he is not as conservative as many of us had wished. The Supreme Court should have stuck down this bill as an offense to the 1st Amendment.