Rajnath Singh Quotes

We may be so eager to protect the right to dissent that we lose sight of the difference between dissent and subversion.

Whatever objection there is to so called violation of personal liberty, it does not count when the supremacy of the law and the stability of our intuitions are menaced.

We completely uphold the right of freedom of assembly. But there is always that important balance between security and freedom of expression in countries undergoing circumstances like ours.

Speech is an essential mechanism of democracy, for it is the means to hold officials accountable to the people. [...] The right of citizens to inquire, to hear, to speak, and to use information to reach consensus is a precondition to enlightened self-government and a necessary means to protect it. [...] By taking the right to speak from some and giving it to others, the Government deprives the disadvantaged person or class of the right to use speech to strive to establish worth, standing, and respect for the speaker’s voice. The Government may not by these means deprive the public of the right and privilege to determine for itself what speech and speakers are worthy of consideration. The First Amendment protects speech and speaker, and the ideas that flow from each.

Nobody should have the right to eavesdrop, or you become a totalitarian state - the kind of state I escaped as a kid to come to this country where you have democracy and freedom of speech.

People have the right to protest - that's what democracy is all about. I have no problem with people exercising their democratic rights.

Even if I were knocked down by one gunshot it wouldn't affect our democracy and I wasn't knocked down and I have great confidence in our democracy and in Taiwan and in the people of Taiwan.

And a democracy can't exist without free speech and the right to assemble. And that's what Americans tend to forget. And they're born into a culture where they take all of their freedoms for granted.

The balance between freedom and security is a delicate one.

If a jerk burns the flag, America is not threatened, democracy is not under siege, freedom is not at risk.

As to the media, they are protected by the First Amendment, as they should be.

We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.

I think it's important, however, that as we again talk about the importance of free speech we make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not America they are not who were they are not what we do and they will be prosecuted, so I want that message to be clear also.

To open his lips is crime in a plain citizen.

In America we can say what we think, and even if we can't think, we can say it anyhow.

In a democracy one must have the right to express oneself and that's what I do, even if it displeases.

It is the right of our people to organize to oppose any law and any part of the Constitution with which they are not in sympathy.

I'm entitled to my political opinions, and I get to vote because I'm an American.

A simple way to determine whether the right to dissent in a particular society is being upheld is to apply the town square test: Can a person walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment, or physical harm? If he can, then that person is living in a free society. If not, it's a fear society.

The right to dissent is the only thing that makes life tolerable for a judge of an appellate court... the affairs of government could not be conducted by democratic standards without it.

Every society has a right to preserve public peace and order, and therefore has a good right to prohibit the propagation of opinions which have a dangerous tendency.

The free society tolerates those within it who would use that freedom to destroy it.

The ministry of interior may censor newspapers and ban them if they include anything that violates public security, threatens national unity, or contradicts Islam.

Men may die, but the fabric of free institutions remain unshaken.

The cry has been that when war is declared, all opposition should therefore be hushed. A sentiment more unworthy of a free country should hardly be propagated. If the doctrine be admitted, rulers have only to declare war and they are screened at once from scrutiny.