Limits Of 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.

Freedom of speech is one of our rights listed in the first amendment, but there should be a limit on what we can and cannot say. Because of the internet, there's a better chance of people getting bullied. People can hide behind a computer screen and say what the want to others without the person knowing who they are. Schools should care about this because this can put students in harm's way. I feel that school should be able to put a limit on students online speech. Three main reasons why there should be a limit on students online speech is boys and girls get bullied everyday over the internet, it causes disturbances in school, and it puts more stress of the schools because they have to deal with it according to law.

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.

One reason why schools should limit online speech is because it can hurt many people by cyberbullying and bullying. Evidence that supports this reason is that in Doc. A( Cyberbullying by Gender), it states that at least 25.1 % get bullied in a lifetime, and of that, many people have been hurt. This helps explain why schools should limit students’ speech because that means that at least ¼ of the community have been cyberbullied in a lifetime, so at least some of those people have been affected.

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

Although the First Amendment is not that vague, schools have struggled to define what its limits are for the past 40 years. One may argue that a student’s Freedom of Speech should not be limited because of our First Amendment rights, the fact that so many schools struggle to define their limits and that they all have different limits, also, limiting a student’s Freedom of Speech brings totalitarianism to schools.

Firstly, freedom of speech should not be limited because it give students a voice. For example, there was a case in that ended in 1969 called the Tinker v. Des Moines case. “In 1965, when Mary Beth Tinker was 13 years old, she wore a black armband to her junior high school to protest the Vietnam War.” (Wheeler). This showed her spreading her opinion and using her voice that freedom of speech in school gave her. If schools had no limit to freedom of speech, students would be allowed to spread their opinions freely just like Mary did. The Tinker v. Des Moines ended up becoming one of the largest and most important cases in history for freedom of speech in schools. Also, a third grade

The espionage act of (1917) during the world war I violated the freedom of speech while the United States was in war and five other declared war. For this reason, they refused from accepting people to withdraw from the army. Drafting resulted in the violation of humans right. In the court case Cohen v. California involved the violation of the freedom of speech. Cohen was charged for “maliciously and willfully disturb[ing] the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or person [by] offensive conduct.” (Fisher and Harriger, 2016, p.479). Cohen was not happy with the draft stated his disagreement to the Vietnam war by wearing a jacket that says “Fuck The Draft. Stop The War” his statement was considered a violating under the California’s law by going

When the United States Constitution was written it, it was written for every single person, no matter the age, to have freedom of speech, press, and assembly. If school limited freedom of speech they would be violating the Constitution and our Founding Fathers. It would practically be a federal law violation. One of the most important documents in the world states that we, Americans, have the right to freedom of speech. It would be very wrong if schools limited our freedom of speech. We would not be America if we didn’t have freedom of

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

The Founders made the press a First Amendment priority in the United States Constitution as a “protected role” to act as a check on elected officials. The press was part of the Constitutional “checks and balances” in holding elected officials accountable and to be observant for exploitation, as the press were in essence “the eyes and ears of the people.” Freedom of the press is the irrefutable privilege to propagate opinions in print without censorship by the government. Americans enjoy freedom of the press under the First Amendment to the Constitution, which states: “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

Why would a seventy-year-old philosopher be put to death for what he was teaching in a society enjoying more freedom and democracy than any the world had ever seen? Plato (427-347 B.C.E.) is especially important to the understanding of the trial of Socrates because he, along with Xenophon, wrote the only two surviving accounts of the defense (or apology) of Socrates. Plato’s account is generally given more attention by scholars of the two authors because he, unlike Xenophon, actually attended the one-day trial of Socrates in Athens in 399 B.C.E. Both Plato and Chaerophon, another important witness present at the trial, knew how Socrates engaged in the Athenian intellectual community, what he shared with its members, and how original it may have been. Plato has been both a pupil and somewhat ardent admirer of Socrates, and for this reason his version of the trial may have been somewhat biased in favor of one whom he regarded as a great hero. At any rate, historians may be fairly certain that, even though Socrates has been to some extent idealized by his pupil, the account given represents what Plato believed to be true about his teacher. The turbulent history of Athens in the several years preceding his trial had a lot to do with the decisions to prosecute and ultimately convict Socrates. An examination of that history may not provide final answers, but it does provide

According to Susan Jacoby, noted feminist and New York Times columnist, “I am a First Amendment junkie. You can’t OD on the First Amendment, because free speech is its own best antidote” (A First Amendment Junkie,19). Free speech is best refuted by itself because if someone doesn’t like a certain opinion, then they can reciprocate their opinion. In order for free speech to be refuted, someone needs to exercise their right of free speech and refute it. Jacoby is writing in the mid-to-late 70s, when the freedom of speech was in debate. Even more so now, people are arguing and misinterpreting free speech in the First Amendment. The First Amendment specifically states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment . . . or abridging

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.

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.