In the beginning of the Twentieth Century, there developed in Germany and other parts of Europe two movements which came to be known as psychic science and spiritualism. Abstractly, psychic science may appear to be nothing more than an interest in psychic phenomena, but in actual practice, it has served as a synonym for spiritualism. It has denied the existence of a God and has viewed religious experience as something very mysterious. But in the modern world, psychic science is slowly taking on a respectable position as a separate science. It now attracts a considerable number of practitioners, especially those from a non-secular background. The word science itself originally denoted the older form of divination used by the ancient Greeks.
There are many points of similarity between early Spiritualists and modern Spiritualists. Both regard psychic phenomena as the product of an unseen intelligence which acts on the living and the non-living. They both believe that the soul, which is immortal and ethereal, passes through the medium of the physical body in order to reach the consciousness of the spirit world. Both Spiritualists and Deists believe in a separation between the gods and the mortal world, though they have different ideas about the relationship between these two entities. Both accept a belief in the existence of a supreme being, the creator of the universe and the guide and teacher of humanity.
Early Spiritualists were, however, far less consistent in their beliefs than modern Spiritualists giai ma bi an the gioi. They often accused the priests and clergy of using “coincidences” and “miracles” as legitimate evidence of the existence of God. Similarly, Spiritualists were often put to the test by the priests of their religion when it came to determining what was not true. Frequently, the outcome of a Spiritualist investigation would be damaging to the priests’ faith. Spiritualists have generally opposed any attempts by government to control free speech because they consider themselves the purer form of worship.
Modern Spiritualists who adheres to the “inerrantist” view believes that there is no such thing as free speech, since all communication is inherently deceptive. This means that all communication is ultimately meaningless and is only meant to serve as a vehicle through which an agent of deception can speak. Psychic ability is considered to be inherent in all people, and therefore any fraudulent seen in psychic ability is automatically attributed to the individual’s inborn sin nature. Thus, any Fraudulent Probabilities are deemed less drastic than those associated with the use of Psychic Illusions such as astrology, palmistry and tarot card reading.
Many Non-secularists argue that even if fraud is present in any instance of communication, it does not constitute a violation of First Amendment rights since the law protects all forms of communication. They maintain that while a Municipality may ban bomb threats or nudity on public beaches, the same cannot be done to protect the “right of the people to peacefully assemble.” Some feel that this type of ordinance is actually a violation of the right of free speech. As for the overbroadness of a Private Placeman’s Warranty, they maintain that a Private Placeman is not a “committer” of the crime but merely has a commercial interest in offering a service that goes beyond what a Private Citizen can do. Thus, a Private Placeman’s Warranty is not a violation of a free speech right, and it is not a violation of the right of the people to peacefully assemble.
In order to understand the dilemma that many persons find themselves caught in when attempting to legally defend their right to speak, it is useful to revisit the First Amendment. One of the fundamental rights protected by that amendment is the right to peacefully assemble. That right is considered essential by the Supreme Court and other courts throughout the country. There have been many attempts by citizens to legally defend their right to speak, and in the modern era, it appears that the courts are increasingly siding with the overbroad fringe. Therefore, those who wish to legally protect their right to speak should consult with a knowledgeable attorney who will determine whether or not a Private Placeman’s Warranty is preempted by a prior law, such as an Act passed by a legislative body.