Freedom Of Speech : The First Amendment

All the time, people are heard protesting about “Free Speech”, and “The First Amendment”. What rights are really protected under the First Amendment according to our Constitution? The answer may be shocking. In the United States of America, the concept of free speech is widely called upon to reinforce the legality of offensive spoken words or actions. In reality, not all speech is protected under the First Amendment. Sure, everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but where is the line between what opinions are acceptable to be spoken of in public, and what is inappropriate or too offensive. The true answer lies in the definition of the word public. While government run agencies such as public universities have little they can do about what students say, private colleges have virtually no requirements by law.

Freedom of speech is perhaps the most precious tenets of liberal democracies accorded to the citizens of the free world. The United States, and the rest of the Western society is known to be the cradle of democratic principles, and this can be evidenced by the level of freedom accorded to the citizens of the United States and the West in terms of speech. The freedom of speech gives an individual an opportunity to speak his or her mind and also give his or her opinion, sometimes on very sensitive topics, without any fear of reprisal (Melkonian, 2012).

Words are significant; they enable us to be expressive and create individuality amongst ourselves. According to Literacy, “The right to speak without censorship or restraint by the government… is protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution.” (Literacy, 2005) This definition describes the most important freedom in my eyes. Without freedom of speech, I am unable to be the individual that I strive to be, which is to stick out and be unique, which is why I treasure freedom of speech the most. I am going to take advantage of my freedom of speech and use it to cultivate and progress my business goals in life to make me successful as a woman in the business world.

Free speech and expression are unalienable rights which cannot be taken away under any circumstances due to its origins. As an amendment in the United States Constitution, it gives the people to power to speak freely without worry of consequence or punishment from the government. This right is one of many that makes America a democratic nation, and so appealing to others who are denied these fundamental rights. However, there are instances where individuals abuse this right, by encouraging violence or hate to the point where people take action, and due to this, their right to free speech should be limited.

“Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances,” (“The Bill of Rights: A Transcription). Arguably one of the most important amendments, the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States is generally summarized as protecting the rights of each citizen to Freedom of Expression. While it may be one of the core values of American society, one’s right to Freedom of Expression has become involved in a debate that rages on in the modern day. The First Amendment has become one of the main supports for the argument against the Political Correctness Movement, which has been growing and gaining more influence over the years. Many feel that this controversial movement, which puts an emphasis on removing or changing language and behavior that could be considered offensive, stands in direct opposition to the First Amendment. Proponents of the Political Correctness Movement argue that there is no conflict between Political Correctness and Freedom of Expression. There is no dispute, however, that this debate has had an influence on many different parts of society. From politics to academics, to media, to business, and even to casual conversation, this debate is virtually

The First Amendment of the United States Constitution stands for one of the most basic and essential beliefs of the American people-freedom. Too often, Americans take these freedoms for granted, these freedoms that many countries today still do not have. How many countries/cultures in the world today are led by dictators intent on control and power? What freedoms do these countries actually have? Simply speaking out against the government in any such country could enforce a severe penalty. Thankfully, however, Americans do not live in a country like this…or do they? “Today…there are strong indications that we may have failed to create a lasting

In many countries around the world, the right to freedom of speech has been upheld for citizens. Freedom of speech is the idea that any person can express their opinions without being punished. In the United States freedom of speech has been declared an unalienable right to every citizen. This was declared when the United States was founded hundreds of years ago. This declaration has yet to be made for every place in the world. There are still many people who are being oppressed by their country’s government or other organizations. Everyone should have the right to freedom of speech, but many people are censored.

In the United States of America, the first amendment on the United States Constitution guaranteeing that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. In December of 1966, a man named Clarence Brandenburg was sent was sent to prison and convicted but all he did was exercising his first amendment right to freedom of speech. In the summer of 1964 in Rural, Ohio, just north of Cincinnati, Clarence Brandenburg led a Ku Klux Klan rally and invites a Cincinnati news station to cover the event. The station agreed to it and started filming portions of the rally showing 12 men with hoods and robes and with some of whom carried firearms. Plus some shouting horrible ethic things plus they film them standing around a wooden cross and started burning it. Near the end of the rally, Brandenburg concluded the rally by saying a speech and portions of the speech were filmed live. He said, “"This is an organizers' meeting. We have had quite a few members here today, which are -- we have hundreds, hundreds of members throughout the State of Ohio. I can quote from a newspaper clipping from the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch, five weeks ago Sunday morning. The Klan has more members in the State of Ohio than does any other organization. We're not a revengent organization, but if our President, our Congress, our Supreme Court continues to suppress the white, Caucasian race, it’s possible that there might have to be some revengeance taken. We are marching on Congress July the Fourth, four hundred thousand strong. From there we dividing into two groups, one group to march on St. Augustine, Florida, the other group to march into Mississippi. Thank you.” After the new station aired the KKK rally, local authorities arrested Brandenburg for leading the rally and for it to be on the news. They charged him for breaking the Ohio Criminal Syndicalism Act. The act made illegal advocating “crime, sabotage, violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism as a means of accomplishing industrial or political forum,” as well as

There are many issues that revolve around the right to speak freely. There are responsibilities that should be recognized that correlate with the freedom of speech. At what point does one’s words, written or spoken, become inappropriate? Should Americans be held accountable for the things that they might say or write? Should there be consequences for publishing or broadcasting information that is not correct? How are Americans suppose to differentiate what should and should not be deemed common knowledge, or privileged information? These issues are an important aspect of being American. When examining freedom of speech, Americans should be aware of how speech, verbal or written, affects the unity of our nation, government policy and public safety.

Even though freedom of speech can be tricky, understanding what can be said under the first amendment is key. This will give you more confidence when you 're talking about current events, it 'll inhibit social interaction, but the biggest reason of all is understanding your rights will keep you out of jail. Even the supreme court struggles to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. When trying to see if your covered by the first amendment, certain questions have to be displayed. Are we free to say whatever we want? Exactly what is freedom of speech, what can I say, and what can 't I say and still be covered by the first amendment? Understanding the dilemma that freedom of speech just like anything else, has stipulations, making it not truly freedom of speech. An example of this stipulation would be, yelling fire in a crowded building, just because. The first amendment won 't protect you, on the contrary, you are able to yell it if there 's actually a fire. Furthermore the goal of this paper is to attempt to make sense of this concept. Freedom of speech is the right to communicate one 's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship. Freedom of speech isn 't a black and white issue. Theirs other types of speech, such as pure speech, and symbolic speech which has to be neutral. Pure speech refers to spoken communication, while symbolic speech is communication expressed symbolically rather than pure speech. The first amendment is one of

As the United States plans to give up their control of the Internet Domain Name Registration in the spring of 2015, many Americans see that as a serious threat to their first amendment right of free speech. This fear is not a new concept. In January 2009, Jeffrey Rosen wrote an article for the New York Times, “Free Speech on the Web: Is the Internet Really the Bastion of Free Expression That We Think it Is?” In his essay, Rosen shows Americans a side of the Internet that they are not accustomed to: free speech in other countries being blocked by Google, because it does not meet the laws of those countries. By doing this, Rosen approaches the topic of free speech in the United States and how the policies surrounding the relationship between Internet usage and free speech could change.

The debate of Citizen’s United v FEC (2010) stirs a discussion about how the protection of speech found in the First Amendment applies to campaign spending. Justice Kennedy and Justice Stevens provide opposing viewpoints and dissents on this case. They have different arguments as for whether limitations on corporate funding of political broadcasts in candidate elections is or is not a violation of the First Amendment.

Freedom of speech is known to be the essence of America's democratic principles, which has created doubts and chaos inside the country leading to further limitations. Congress has seen themselves in the midst of internal war as protest have come down to violence and further offenses/ harm the first amendment has rejected such awful forms of expressions placing a fence to one of the civil rights granted by the United States. Although the first amendment stands as part of the democratic ideals granting the people in the United States freedom of expression, the government should appropriately limited this basic civil right, with the attempts of preventing violence, or unlawful methods of terrorism restricting.

The national anthem of the United States, a symbol of our nation’s patriotism, roots, and ideals, has recently been in top headlines. Players of the National Football League (NFL) have recently used the singing of the national anthem prior to football games to protest their perceived failures of the United States Government. This controversy started in 2016, when San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick kneeled during the singing of the national anthem, claiming it was a protest against the racial oppression and inequality that has occurred for many African Americans in the country. On one hand, Kaepernick was celebrated for his bravery and willingness to act as a leader for the Black Lives Matter movement, an activist movement motivated against police brutality against African Americans. His silent protest is supported by those who believe he simply practiced his freedom of speech. On the other hand, he was criticized by others who believed his actions acted as a protest against the flag and its deeper meaning. Those who believe this point of view think that his anti-American movement highlighted his privileges of being a spoiled NFL player, that is, his salary, benefits, and media attention. Now, during the 2017 NFL season, all 32 teams and many players have shown acts of protesting the national anthem for various reasons, whether kneeling on the field, locking arms, and even staying in the locker room, as the Pittsburgh Steelers demonstrated during the season.

The free speech clause of the First Amendment should protect offensive speech. Offensive speech is intuitive. There is no limit to how far the government can go to say what you can not say. Our First Amendment “guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition….It guarantees freedom of expression by prohibiting Congress from restricting the press or the rights of individuals to speak freely. It also guarantees the right of citizens to assemble peaceable and to petition their government.” (First Amendment).