Limiting Freedom Of Speech

This year’s election alone has brought about many emotions and deep rooted feelings that have not come out in years. Hate speech and actions carried out because of hate speech has cause a deep division in American culture. Groups like “Black Lives Matter”, “All Lives Matter”, and “Alt-Right” are all under fire for things that have been said or done in the names of these groups. There has been terrorist attacks in the names of religious groups whom believe that a newspaper or group has insulted their religion, beliefs, and gods. Not to mention our own President Elect of the United States, Donald Trump, has been accused of fueling much of the hate speech we see today. This begs the question, should freedom of speech have any restrictions or be limited in any way, or is that unconstitutional? To look at this we must first identify what “Freedom of Speech” is as defined in the constitution and how it relates to current issues in the world and in America, then I will talk about some situations where regulation is already put in place in America, lastly we will look at some situations where I believe freedom of speech could use some clarification or restriction.

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

The First Amendment declares free speech to all types of speech by all of its people. The issue arises in a college setting where “hate speech” does not fall under free speech and is therefore enforced with speech codes. The biggest controversy is determining what is considered hate speech and what is not. So when did it become the governments job to determine a student’s acceptance or disapproval of another individual(s) train of thought? Implying speech codes on a college campus only poses a threat to ones own freedom of expression and thought. Free speech in the form of hate speech should not be regulated on a college campus because it is often times understood differently by others, it also challenges our freedom of assertion and although

Second, college students should be heard, supported and even refuted. When hate speech is allowed on campuses, students and faculty can state different problems that are taboo in real world. When the “hate” is out, students express their points of view and sometimes issues that are not being solved. For me, hate speech is a way that as college student we can be heard and different issues can be solved.

The United States is quite a diverse country, people coming from or born into different ethnic groups. Over the years, Americans used their freedom of speech to bring positive changes within society. However there has also been harsh criticism and disapproval that has caused protest with extreme actions. Knowing the history of America concerning minorities rights, there are most movements that were seen as hate speech. Most freedom of speech is protected including hate speech. Yet it has caused harm mentally and physically to the targets including causing violent actions.What is considered hate speech is speech that attacks a single person or group based on their race, ethnic origin, disability, sexual identity, or gender. While hate speech does bring psychological harm to its targets and to tolerate is not enough, putting restrictions towards hate speech could cause more problems within college campus and a social uproar.

Under the First Amendment, we as Americans have protected rights known as Freedom of Speech. How I see Freedom of Speech is it gives us the right to voice our own opinions without any retaliation or repercussions. An example in which Freedom of Speech may be utilized is before, during and after a Presidential Election. Many people will have their own opinions about how they see each Presidential Candidate fit or unfit. Alot of times after people exercise this right, Rallys and Protests occur. Unfortunetly sometimes when this does happen, boundaries are overstepped. This can result in threats, crimes, slander ad even people getting

Imagine being arrested for calling someone a mean name. The first amendment to the United States Constitution grants freedom of expression. Such liberties distinguish the United States from other nations who lack liberties for their people. However, plenty of people claim freedom of speech is abused by people to harass minorities with hate speech. Hate speech is a verbal attack on a person or group due to their ethnic background, race, gender, sexuality, religion or disability. Numerous people demand a ban on hate speech from college campuses. However, in elementary, middle and high school, we were taught to not ridicule other religions, races or sexualities. In college, we are all adults and should be able to carry ourselves accordingly. The campuses should not kick students out because they have different beliefs that are offensive. Even though it is not morally correct to offend or be disrespectful to a person by stripping them of their dignity, it is not illegal. Taking away a person’s voice strips his or her right to express themselves because they are forced to remain silent. Just

The founding fathers made free speech the First Amendment not to protect popular speech, but for the protection of unpopular speech that goes against the views of the majority. In the United States, colleges are a form of higher education beyond high school where students go further themselves for their future careers. While at college, students engage in debates that will either reaffirm or make them rethink their own beliefs, in turn making students active and engaged US citizens. However, recently an emergence of calls for the regulation of speech have gained popularity across US campuses. These people seek to regulate speech to keep students from taking offense from speech in order to promote an inclusive and diverse college environment. Colleges have a responsibility to maintain a welcoming environment for all students on campus regardless of their race or religion. However, questions to how

Limits on our rights limit freedom. Colin Kaepernick, a former 49ers quarterback, took a knee during the presentation of the protested during the U.S. national anthem as a way of social protest. Kaepernick and others following his suit have silently protested racial inequality and police brutality. Protesting the national anthem is an appropriate form of free speech. Due to exercising the First Amendment, nonviolent protesting, and by being national, influential football players, refusing to stand for the national anthem is ethical.

On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified. According to, In Our Defense: The Bill of Right in Action, the First Amendment stated 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” (Alderman and Kennedy, pg.21). Because of the First Amendment, hate speech, “no matter how offensive its content”, was “protected” under the laws (ACLZ). However, people are still demanding more. They want hate-related speech to be allowed on campuses –without knowing the effects and the damage it could do. Hate speech could bring people down, lower their confidences and their school performance, and in some case, school avoidance. The audiences of offensive speech on campuses are students. At these ages, their brains are still developing and are very sensitive. Hate speech could affect the way they think for their entire life, and in the worst case, it could result in violence. Hate speech should not be protected on college campuses.

Simply put, free speech and its integral role in free society is fading, or rather: free society itself is fading. In our homes, we sit in our leather recliners with a can of forget and a bowl of regret, our mouths wide open, our eyes peeled watching our American gods of knowledge and opinion as they place their words into our mouths, into our hearts, and into our brains. And by our gods, we learn of our true identity - our box that our features and characteristics place us in, what we should really be thinking about, and which side of the political "fiesta" that we should be falling for. Likewise, the young adults in American Colleges are being taught standards of socio-ethical appeasement and continuing these “skills” from college into their daily lives: the fabric of American Society, which is a primary factor in the end of the First Amendment right of the American public. The American population is not only controlled (socio-politically) by the desires and politicization in the industries of advertisement and entertainment but also the “corrupted” situation of the American college, which are both extending the dissolution of free speech in the United States.

Recent debates about freedom of speech have become more common across the United States. Social media has now made it much easier to see videos or pictures of how students react to certain speakers, all of which have led to a whole separate discussion about fragility of students.

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

Rome, which was one of the strongest ancient empires, had worshipped a god named Janus. Romans believed that Janus protected their beginnings, gates and time; in particular, the god was depicted as a male with two faces (Martin 38). Similarly, freedom of speech is two-faced Janus with freedom and limit. According to Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadians are free to think their own thoughts, speak their own minds, to gather peacefully into groups and to associate with whomever they wish, as long as they do not infringe valid regulations which protect the right and interests of others (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom, 1982). In a democratic society, the freedom of speech should be properly regulated to prevent yellow journalism, to protect sensitive state secrets from abuse and to promote a high quality of speech based on responsibility.

Freedom of speech should have some limitations. The American people should have the right to say whatever they want, but to an extent. Whether it is on signs or verbally some things should not be expressed. The United States is well known for being “the home of the free,” but some people take their freedom a bit too far. People can burn flags, protest at military funerals, even use the “n” word and watching pornography in libraries.