Free Speech Is Only Okay If It's Money, National Review Guy Explains

"You Should Find the Anti-Komen Backlash Disgusting, Even If You're Pro-Choice," proclaims National Review guy Daniel Foster. Why? Because "the Left" insists on "besmirching Komen's good name" instead of exercising its freedom of speech in Foster's preferred medium: a check.

Look, the beauty of free speech is that, if you're inclined to do so, you can write a check to PP in an act of solidarity, or write a check to Komen as an expression of moral approval. That's all fine. But there's something quite a bit different, something creepy and not a little despicable, about the Planned Parenthood set's besmirching Komen's good name across a thousand platforms for having the audacity to stop giving them free money.

You hear that, "the Left"? The beauty of free speech is that you can spend money. What could be more beautiful than writing a check? But there's something very different, something creepy and despicable about actually, you know, speaking. That's "gangsterism."

(For the record, I'm pretty sure that real "beauty" of free speech is that it's a universal right, independent of bank account or political opinion, and that even if I can't, say, write a check to Planned Parenthood, I can still voice my support for the organization, and my displeasure with Komen. And Komen and its executives, and their anti-choice supporters have, also, the absolute right to respond to me! And Daniel Foster, let's not forget, has the right to whine about all of it. So many rights involved here.)

[National Review, hat tip to Theon. Image by Jim Cooke, photo via Getty.]