It looks like we're pretty much in agreement, so far. I must say, I'm surprised at that given some of your other posts on this forum. Let's see what comes next:
Anarchy is not a good thing. I think liberals and conservatives alike would agree on that.
So, protest and demonstration to change government is OK, just as it says in the Constitution, but overthrowing the government by force is a last resort. I think most of us would go along with that.
Which is dependent on the interpretation of what is necessary for society's preservation.
Which also is dependent on the judgment of what puts people at risk. We'd all agree that violent crimes need to be punished and potential victims protected from criminals. Sexual practices and drug use are open to interpretation.
On the face of it, that statement would seem to advocate laws against criticizing the government, or staging demonstrations against government policy, the sort of laws that exist in non democratic societies, such as Egypt (where a blogger was just sentenced to four years for writing a piece critical of the government and of Islam) or Iran (where demonstrators have recently been shot for opposing their crazy leader). Surely, that is not the meaning, is it?
