Well, reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with the gentlewoman that any discussion about abortion, both pro-life and pro-abortion rights, is protected by the first amendment guarantee of free speech; and I certainly agree, nothing in title V should be interpreted to inhibit free speech about the topic of abortion. Further, it is correct that our principal intent in adopting this provision was to curb the spread of obscenity and indecency, speech that is not protected by the first amendment, from the Internet in order to protect our children.
Henry Hyde: “Well, reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with the gentlewoman that any discussion about abortion, both…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the First Amendment rights related to abortion during a debate.
Share
More from Henry Hyde
I certainly would like to prevent, if I could legally, anybody having an abortion--a rich woman, a middle-class woman, or a poor woman.
That is what I think of the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos). Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out that substantial compliance is accorded to the Secretary of State, so if 38 of the 39 are complied with, the 39th could have been…
If I may reclaim my time, I want to say to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert), this is a marvelous amendment. The spirit in which it is offered is exemplary, and it is a very difficult thing to oppose it. But I see a problem with it…
An unrelenting Government assault on property rights, fueled by a dangerous and emotional vigilante mentality that sanctions shredding the U.S. Constitution into meaningless confetti.





