A confusing column

Editor Rob Curley’s Sunday (January 10th) column confused me. On the one hand, the U.S. Constitution, and particularly its first amendment, is a timely subject to bring before the paper’s readership, and Rob makes some good points. And, I can understand the temptation to be lighthearted in such distressing times in order to remind ourselves not to take ourselves too seriously. On the other hand, Rob’s lighthearted imagery and sarcasm, intentionally provincial phrasing, and “goofy ideas” could be perceived as mocking, and deriding, which should be confined to the editorial pages, not the “Nation” section where they were printed.

One of Rob’s points that everyone should agree on is that rioting, though in protest, is not protected by the first amendment. I also agree that the first amendment doesn’t protect against abridgement of free speech by a business enterprise. However, I believe that if a business isn’t allowed to discriminate who it serves based on race, or sex, etc., it shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate based on political beliefs, even if those beliefs are deemed “baseless” by the business. The mega-tech firms shouldn’t be granted those discrimination powers.

Another of Rob’s points that I agree with is that Americans are woefully ignorant about our Constitution. With a divided America rising in distrust and animus, I see that as a very serious problem. His idea for a Sunday column that answers the citizenship test questions isn’t so “goofy.” Let’s start with the difference between a republic and a democracy.

Duncan Bean

Spokane Valley