2. John Tabin, to whom Weigel refers when he mentions the freedom of speech issue, is also a libertarian/moderate conservative, and he writes for the conservative rag The American Spectator.
3. The passage from Tabin's article that Weigel refers to, which appears in the conservative rag TAS, reads:
Weigel says in his own article:That she thinks the age of the constitution she's charged with interpreting make it deficient relative to newer constitutions is kind of shocking, particularly in the context of her praise for the rights enshrined in the First Amendment -- rights that, in practice, are protected far less robustly in South Africa or Canada or Europe than they are in the US.
They (and you) are saying this in spite of the fact that she says explicitly (and before anything else) that:I'm with John Tabin at the link -- I agree that our freedom of speech protections are the best place to start for any other country, and that Canada and South Africa have done citizens wrong with weaker basic rights.
So...I don't get it. Are you just ignoring what she's saying here? Do you think she's being disingenuous, and that she's really advocating for Egypt to adopt something like what Canada and SA have - "hate speech" exclusions from freedom of speech protections - which I assume you (and these authors) disagree with?...the constitution - first, it should safeguard basic fundamental human rights, like our First Amendment, the right to speak freely, and to publish freely, without the government as a censor.