Limitations that Freedom of Speech Should Have Essay

“Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.” (Jacobus 93). Just like the Freedom of Religion there are limitations placed on the Freedom of Speech so that other people’s rights aren’t compromised. For example, people are not allowed to present true threats, or “fighting words” to another person. This restriction was put into play in the court case of Chaplinsky vs. New Hampshire. The Court ruled that “fighting words, by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace and may be punished consistent with the First Amendment.” (Ruane 3-4). In this case if someone was to use “fighting words” which is their perceived freedom of speech, it would not only violate the law, it could violate someone’s freedom of pursue life, liberty, and happiness. With this, we can see that freedom is not always as it

In order to find truth to anything, one must make multiple suggestions, ask many questions, and sometimes ponder the unspeakable. Without doing so, there would be no process of elimination; therefore, truth would be virtually unattainable. Now, in our attempts to either find truth, express our beliefs and opinions, or generally use the rights we are given constitutionally, we are often being criticized and even reprimanded. Our freedom to voice our opinion(s) is being challenged, as critics of free speech are taking offense to what seems like anything and everything merely controversial and arguably prejudice. As people continue to strive for a nation free of prejudice and discrimination, where everyone is equal, safe and

America’s first president George Washington once argued at the [whenever he said this] that “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” It is an essential component to the daily life of any constitutional republic, such as that of the United States even though it is a right granted to all American citizens, in the past, freedom of speech has been abridged to accommodate political correctness, to prevent disruptive behavior that could negatively affect others, and to protect confidential military information.

The United States is well-known for its principles of freedom and democracy, which is demonstrated through the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause. Thus, American citizens can openly discuss political matters; criticize the President and his Cabinet on television, radio talk show or in the newspaper; or publicly protest against the government tax policy. However, Free Speech protection becomes debatable when some American citizens burn the nation’s flag to express their disagreement to the government. The act of burning the American Flag should be constitutionally protected under the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause because the act is a symbolic expression that communicates an individual’s idea or opinion about his nation; and that

Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right. Whether or not on a college campus, people (especially college students) should have the right to speak freely. Everyone does have the right to speak freely, because it is one of the twenty-seven amendments. Colleges all around the United States are now home to many restrictions on free speech. For example, the idea and use of “free speech zones” has made its way to colleges everywhere. A “free speech zone” is a sidewalk sized place where students are allowed to speak their minds freely on college campuses. I know what you’re thinking. This sounds ridiculous. Why are there specific places for people to speak their minds? Aren’t colleges suppose to be a place where students speak their minds and learn new things? Universities should not be able to put any restrictions on free speech.

This paper will examine the first amendment’s right to free speech based on three different Supreme Court cases and how there are varying examples of free speech. In the case of Snyder v. Phelps, Snyder sued Phelps, the Westboro Baptist Church, for intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy by intrusion upon seclusion, and conspiracy because the church set-up protest outside of his military son’s funeral service (Chen et al., 2010). Another side of free speech involves a case which allow schools to restrict speech that is promoting illegal drug use. To examine this view this paper will look at the case of Morse v. Frederick. Lastly, this paper will look into the case of Texas v. Johnson. At the end of a

Topic: Do you believe that free speech as proscribed under the first amendment of the constitution should be limited?

People of america have the right to use the first amendment. As it clearly states that, “ Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech…or the right of the people peaceably assemble”(DeSiato). This is important because it gives whomever is protesting safety and reassurance that there will not be a consequence. If government decides to attack the individuals message it would be considered a violation of the first amendment and unconstitutional.

Like most democratic nations in the world, the United States has had its own fair share of issues with hate speech. There has been a lot of controversy over whether hate speech should be regulated. In analyzing the concept of free speech, one cannot ignore that it does not occur in a vacuum. There have been all types of debasements ranging from ethnic, religious, racial and gendered stereotyping. Freedom of speech inherently includes all other fundamental human rights. Hence, as acknowledged through natural rights, other rights and personhood should adamantly be included within this scope of this protection. Hate speech is a limit on free speech, as it not only puts the victim under deliberate psychological and physical harm, but also

Free speech should not be restricted.  The first amendment gives the right for anyone to say whatever he or she wants, whenever they want and guarantees us the privilege to speak our minds without limitations.   Our right to free speech is one thing that sets the United States apart from any other country.  Since September 11, 2001 all

There is one rule to remember about freedom of speech. Just because you can say something doesn't mean you should, and just because you have the right doesn't mean it is right. I believe that the shooting that took place in France on January 7th this current year was unacceptable just because of the misunderstanding of freedom of speech. Charlie Hebdo has been known as a satirical cartoon company, therefore his job was to create irony whether it was based on a political, world, etc. issue. I understand that there are some limits and boundaries that fall under freedom of speech, but this was uncalled for. Muslims are always “the victims” which is not true. The same concept applies to white and black races. I know this does not apply to freedom

Censorship is the limitation of writing or speech that is considered to be harmful to the citizens of the nation. Even though censorship can be carried out by individuals, mostly it’s carried out by the government and used to suppress speeches and media contacts. The idea of censorship spread in Western Europe soon after the printing press in the late 1400s. Before printing, books were made in monasteries, and they decided what to control. The invention, printing press ended the control, monasteries had over written words. Written materials were also made faster and were spread. Soon after the invention, the government started censoring what can be written and distributed (“Censorship”). To protect citizens from the government, the Bill of Rights was created and had the First Amendment in it. The First Amendment was ratified in 1791 in the United States as part of the Bill of Rights and was added to the Constitution ("First Amendment”). It was added as colonists demanded the protection of their individual rights. The Amendment promises its citizens the right to express their thoughts without congress limiting it, however, by starting censorship, congress violated the First Amendment. In addition, congress goes one step further and even makes national laws to suppress speech. The First Amendment is not a viable document because throughout history and still today United States citizens are being punished for saying and expressing

Freedom of speech is more than just the right to say what one pleases. Freedom of speech is the right to voice your opinion on certain topics or dilemmas around you. This basic right given to us in the First Amendment is being challenged by colleges who encourage “freedom of speech” with certain restrictions.

The founders of the United States government tried to protect our liberty by assuring a free press, to gather and publish information without being under control or power of another, in the First Amendment to the Constitution. We are not very protected by this guarantee, so we concern ourselves on account of special interest groups that are fighting to change the freedom of expression, the right to freely represent individual thoughts, feeling and views, in order to protect their families as well as others. These groups, religious or otherwise, believe that publishing unorthodox material is an abuse of free expression under the First Amendment. As we know, the Supreme Court plays an important role in the subject of free speech and

Imagine yourself in a world where you could not say what you wanted, or express how you feel. Everyday thoughts that are said out loud like, “Man, this lesson is dumb” were no longer permitted to be anything other than thoughts. Many people in other countries have rules and regulations on what they can and cannot say. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution gives Americans the right to free speech (Lakoff 260). Learning to speak is something our parents praise us for when we are little. Why, after all the waiting time they endured, would parents let strangers decide what their child could or could not say. Censorship of language and speech is becoming too strict.