Is free speech for all, or just for all those we like?

“Will work for food”, the man’s sign says. I can’t help but think his sign should honestly say:  “Don’t want to work, but I hope this sign will cause you to give me some money”.

Then there is the woman standing at the busy intersection holding a sign that says:  “Family needs help”. 

I look at her, and the recognition on my face must be obvious. She gives me a little smile as if to say:  “Yes it’s me, the same lady you’ve seen standing here at this intersection holding this sign a number of times over the last few months.”

I guess this is her occupation, holding a sign asking people to give her money.

I start to think, well it beats work, I guess. But I can’t imagine that it does.

Then there is the guy sitting at an intersection again, with a sign expressing his hard luck and need for money, with a dog at his side. I can’t help but think:  “If you are so destitute that you have to beg for money by the side of the road, then you probably have no business having a dog.”

Before you write me off as an uncompassionate jerk, please know that I almost always give money to street people in Kansas City who ask, usually a dollar or two, in fact. Why, because I know that they are truly in dire straights, and their begging is not premeditated. They are just wandering around, in an obviously sad state of being, and asking the lawyer with the briefcase for some spare change seems neither premeditated, insincere, nor a full-time scam they employ in lieu of gainful employment.

The others, I’m not so sure.

And one would have to think that the city fathers of any of our suburban communities in Eastern Jackson County would be inclined to implore the local police department to figure out a way to rid the public right of way of such undesirable activity in our relatively pristine communities.

Unfortunately, it’s not that simple.

You see, there are Constitutional principles involved.

Isn’t asking someone for money protected by the guarantee of freedom of speech under the First Amendment?

And, if it is one’s right to hold or post a sign in support of a politician’s candidacy, is it Constitutionally acceptable to tell the hungry man who claims he needs food that he can’t hold a sign so proclaiming?

And, if you let the local Shrine, the boy’s track team, the Knights of Columbus and the Kiwanis club collect pocket change as a fundraising activity, then wouldn’t the Equal Protection clause of the United States Constitution require a local police force to let Joe Deadbeat do the same thing for his beer and dog food money?

These are issues that have been bandied about in the state and federal courts from coast to coast for years, with substantially mixed decisions in a variety of areas under a variety of circumstances.

So while we might be inclined to say beggars are acceptable in those parts of the inner city where aesthetics will not be adversely affected, but not in Independence, Lee’s Summit, or Blue Springs, where we don’t care to be subject to such things, unless of course it is for a charitable cause that we agree with, well, that is precisely the kind of approach that would find itself on shaky legal ground.

And of course, our basic legal rights in the United States are to be applied equally to all, regardless of the popular view of the social desirability of the parties involved.

So far, the U.S. Supreme Court is yet to tackle this issue in a comprehensive way. Perhaps someday it will.

Until then, we have a growing mix of varying decisions by the state and lower federal courts to guide us on these issues. 

So, if you see a man in a suit with a briefcase and a sign that says:  “Lawyer having a bad month,” buy him a scotch and water.