Baguio City’s ordinance on antiprofanity is not only backward, but also downright unconstitutional for being violative of our right to free speech (“Cursing may mean trouble for kids in summer capital,” Regions, 11/7/18).
Free speech is a preferred right, ranked even higher than our liberty and property rights.
This means that, while one may be stripped of his liberty, as in the case of prisoners, his right to free speech would still subsist.
The rationale behind such preference is this: Free speech is the hallmark of our democracy. Without it, other fundamental rights, including our freedom of religion and our right to due process, would wither, if not die.
The Supreme Court has already emphasized a couple of times that profanity, in itself, should not be censored.
In the case of Reyes vs People, for instance, the Court ruled that “putang ina,” one of the usual profane phrases, is nothing but a common expression employed, not really to slander, but rather to express displeasure.
Clearly, it falls well within the mantle of our constitutional protection.
We should always strive to reject any attempt to infringe on or diminish our right to free speech. Its death is simply the death of our democracy.
REJINEL VALENCIA, rejinelgvalencia@gmail.com