I believe the modern interpretation of the First Amendment should mean that we should have the absolute freedom to express ourselves in any way we see fit.

We need absolute freedom to live to our potential. Freedom doesn't allow us to be unruly and cause problems, it is the other way around. Only when we feel stripped of our personal freedoms will we challenge that lack of freedom by acting in unruly ways. If we merely aren't supposed to burn the flag then we won't burn the flag; but if it is made illegal to burn the flag, we will deliberately burn it in order to gain the freedom again, because intelligent people feel disrespected when we are treated like children, animals, or some kind of sub-human who doesn't know the difference between right and wrong.

It must be recognized, however, that there are certain stages of society where a significant percentage of society actually doesn't know the difference between right and wrong, thus necessitating certain laws. Certainly in feudal times we needed certain laws such as the prohibition of flag burning in order to keep the rulers in power, and thusly society harmonious, but times have changed. We need to understand that we have moved out of feudalism, empires and monarchies, and moved into democracy where we have enough social enlightenment that we aren't in danger of rebellion.

It must also be understood, however, that each time a society decides that it is time to move to a higher form of government, it must be instigated by the citizens. The rulers can't be expected to decide for the people that they are ready for a democracy, only the people can decide that. It should go without saying that when the people make the decision to change the way their government is handled, that the people in power will not go along with it; it takes a special person to sacrifice their position for an untested new form of government.

We need to understand that as a society changes it is the responsibility of the individual citizens to push that change, but it is equally important for us to understand that every kind of change comes with friction. This friction is usually called "birthing pains". Birthing Pains happen everywhere. Women hurt when they give birth to babies, plants die when winter comes, things crack when water freezes, and erode when it thaws. The world becomes polluted with industrialization, people go out of business when new inventions are made. The list goes on and on.

Once we understand these two rules: 1) It is the individual peoples responsibility to change society, not the leaders, and 2) Changes come with friction; along with the changes our society has made over the years, we will clearly see why our society has become freer over the years and why this new exeresis in freedom has caused problems. More importantly, we will see, as if looking through a crystal ball, where our society is going in the future, and what we need to do to get there faster.

A lot of First Amendment cases have to do with disputes over business and money, and I don't see what that has to do with the freedom of speech and free expression, so I will only address that part of it.

I find it fascinating that so many of the law suits involving the first amendment are between students and their school administrators, which involve schools punishing students for insulting them. I am glad that the courts upheld the constitution and ruled for the students. School administrators need to understand that their institutions are publicly funded and so they are subject to the US constitution. I believe private schools and companies should have the right to do what they want with their subjects, which brings another issue into play; the issue of deciding what should be private and what should be public. Industry and institutions that we need to survive should be public, and those smaller ones should be private. For example, energy companies, and schools should be public, whereas Churches should be private. If a Church receives public money they should be subject to public laws. I don't think any Church should receive public money though, neither a private school.

The cases involving the schools are interesting because they represent a microcosm of the problems we faced during feudalism, and the school administrators still think we live in a feudal world. For example, suspending a student for giving his teacher the finger is like a lord kicking his surf off his land for waving his shovel at him in anger. We graduated from the lord verses serfdom, and allowed people to own their own land for a reason. If the lord can do whatever he wants he will be corrupted. Remember the saying, "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely". If schools can kick students out of school for giving a teacher the finger, the school administrators and teachers may start believing they have the right to kick a student out of class for so much as disagreeing with them; I've seen it myself. If schools had this kind of power over students, students would be far less inclined to speak their minds on all kinds of subjects, and their minds will close down and they will become less intelligent. It is not the job of schools to make their students less intelligent. It is the job of schools to encourage all kinds of discourse, even if it is deemed distasteful. Children have different ways of expressing themselves than adults.

Students should have the right to make websites that are insulting to anybody they want to. No harm could come from a website no matter what its content is. One might argue that it could incite violence, but I say it is the exact opposite. The suppression of expression is what incites violence. When people can't express themselves, they compress their negative emotions inside until they explode. If you believe someone expressing their grievances will cause a riot, you have an inaccurate and negative view on human nature. We need to remember that civilized societies like the US are that way because the citizens are civilized. Punishing someone for insulting someone else, making a website about someone, or whatever, does more harm than good.

In fact, I believe students who insult their school administrators online are doing their duties as upholding their freedom and rights in "redressing their grievances" with their government, their schools. The only problem is they are young and haven't been taught how to express those grievances in a tasteful manner.

A teachers desire to punish students for attacking

There are two areas concerning the first Amendment: 1) Censorship, and 2) Insults and Slander over the internet.

I think the First Amendment issues that are going around these days concerning on-line slander and insults in schools is the perfect stage for examining exactly how we need to change so schools can become a place for learning instead of a place for control.

The First Amendment is also the defining aspect of the place the United States of America plays in the world stage.  It is a legacy that is a constant reminder of what America came from.  Because of the First Amendment the American people are the freest minded in the world. This is evidenced by it's dominance in music, movies, and television, otherwise known as "pop" culture, around the world.

Because of our freedom of speech we aren't afraid to use our imaginations to do great things.  It is our adherence to this belief that shows our great faith in God.  When we believe in absolute freedom, we have absolute faith that there is no need to control any outside force because the forces of God, which are the forces of good, will always naturally shine supreme over evil.