Why is the SoP so Important? Intro

Isn’t any statement, by definition, speech? Writing is deemed speech as have been many other forms of human communication – art, dance, non-violent protest and obstruction of public interaction. Jurisprudence in the western world simply assumes that writing is speech essentially as a matter of judicial notice. So, then it is axiomatic that any restriction on speech is an infringement on free speech. For the most part, the proponents of the SoP themselves don’t contest this argument.

But the SoP is actually a lot worse than that. It attacks not just freedom of speech but freedom of thought. Normally when we talk about violations of freedom of speech, we talk in terms of prohibiting someone from speaking. A gag order or some such thing. It is simply a restriction stopping you from saying something. It’s one level of bad to stop someone from saying something ... it a whole other level of bad to force someone to say something. Here, the SoP doesn’t just simply stop you from speaking up about what your principles are, it actually makes you profess believing someone else’s principles. This isn’t just a restriction on speech, it is a compulsion to speak. Indeed, it is a compulsion to profess a belief. Is it their argument that you can have principles without thinking about them?

Full Article - Why is SoP so Important? Intro