The baristas, in turn, have hired a lawyer and made an argument that is germane to current disputes about freedom of speech. What makes this a matter of more than mere ribaldry is that the baristas have unlimbered heavy constitutional artillery. To argue deontologically is to treat speech as an autonomous good, regardless of its moral or social purpose, if it has one. The Supreme Court’s First Amendment jurisprudence, Weiner notes, has generally accorded the most robust protection to speech , and speech that is political, broadly defined — concerned with securing the goods of self-government. The fundamental purpose (telos), although not the only purpose, of the right to free speech is to protect a panoply of other rights.

Source: Washington Post October 04, 2017 23:37 UTC