Swearing Bylaws in Different States

Charles R. Lawrence III, a law professor at Georgetown University, released an article named “On Racist Speech” against the growing frequency of racial violence, especially in University campuses in the U.S., to the Chronicle of Higher Education in 1989. Lawrence begins his article by focusing on the message that hate speech “sends a destructive message to minorities that they are inferior.” The author brings up many other examples to support his message such as the court case Brown vs the Board of Education, instances of racist posters and fliers in college dormitories, and protesting against a “fighting words exemption.” Lawrence argues that although it is difficult for the government to write a law that will prevent racist speech without

According to the New Hampshire statute, no person is allowed to address any other person using any offensive or annoying words in public or street. It also restricts a person to call any other person by any derisive names.

language is vulgar, lewd, and demeaning. As of 2015, all states in the United States, except for

In the case of Shanna’s Shirt, the school district had a written policy in place stating that “clothing may not advocate or advertise drugs, alcohol, or tobacco and may not contain lewd, profane, or vulgar language or symbols.” Clearly, Shanna’s shirt did not violate the policy. The school district should consider adding another criteria that bans clothing that causes substantial disruption and also include banning hate messages. In the case of Shanna’s shirt, a previous case of Harper v. Poway (2006) ruling by the U.S. Supreme court upheld the ban of a similar shirt that read “Homosexuality is Shameful. Romans 1:27.” The court used the reasoning that the language violated the rights of other students by being hurtful to the offended

v. City of St. Paul, the Court overturned a statute prohibiting speech or symbolic expression that "arouses anger, alarm or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender" on the grounds that, even if the specific statute was limited to fighting words, it was unconstitutionally content-based and viewpoint-based because of the limitation to race-/religion-/sex-based fighting words. The Court, however, made it repeatedly clear that the City could have pursued "any number" of other avenues, and reaffirmed the notion that "fighting words" could be properly regulated by municipal or state governments.

Despite that students now use profanity in their public schools and even more out of school, this could cause more children and teens to use the offensive language around their peers.

What is free speech? Does the term ‘free speech’ cover offensive words? Painful ones? Words that disrespect others? What about objectionable, or even wrong beliefs? When is speech illegal? What is exactly meant by free speech? According to Rampell, the term ‘free speech’ includes ‘hate speech’, and is therefore protected by the first amendment (np). This means that even messages we don’t like, agree with, feel uncomfortable about, or even are disgusted by, are legal. Unfortunately, many college students consider harmful words an assault, and some students believe that such verbal attacks can and should be met with violence (French np). Students and speakers today are discriminated against in classrooms and other scenes where free speech and debate should be especially cherished.

According to the University of Colorado, many political jurisdictions have enacted laws that forbid destructive speech. These laws give the police power to investigate persons suspect of committing hate speech. If found guilty, the persons are tried and punished according to the law. Although many insist that hate speech should be illegal, the First Amendment still stands; the right of free speech applies to every citizen of the United States and if restrictions are set, then that liberty is taken away.

As of today, the supreme court has interpreted the first amendment to say “The First Amendment provides no protection for obscenity, child pornography, or speech that constitutes what has become widely known as “fighting words.” The First Amendment provides less than full protection to commercial speech, defamation (libel and slander), speech that may be harmful to children, speech broadcast on radio and television (as opposed to speech transmitted via cable or the Internet), and public employees’ speech.”(Ruane, Kathleen Ann) with this loose definition in mind many people have begun to think whether freedom of speech should be further limited to several cases seen in recent years such as what happened in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Diverse communities in the United States set certain laws to protect their properties from being vandalized with graffiti and protect them from loud noise; rules of this kind should be evenly upheld in order to not discriminate for or against anybody’s opinions or ideas. If the governing authorities see fit to change the laws to prohibit such expressions, they should be cautious. Bok says we are faced with the main example of, the conflict between our commitment to free speech and our desire to have a community founded on mutual respect. Bok shows that power of

The University of Wisconsin designed a speech code that sanctioned expressive behavior that “(1) [is] racist or discriminatory; (2) [Is] directed at an individual; (3) Demean the race, sex, religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or age of the individual addressed; and (4) Create an intimidating, hostile or demeaning

The purpose of this paper is to discuss public school districts' limits on "hate" speech and

Besides literal uses for cuss words (as verbs), over two-thirds of all swearing is linked in expressing some kind of emotional connotation. These help with expressing the speaker’s anger, frustration, and surprise (“son of a bitch”, “f*ck me!”, “holy shit!”) which are done in emotional outbursts of these single words, also known as epithets. In addition profanity has a direct connection with emotional response in that when one utters one of these “worser words” it helps increase heart rate and work as an analgesic, showing how it can help manage emotional pain as it has a direct connection. One such emotional connection could be noted in the use of “FUBAR” (F*ucked up beyond all recognition) in the movie Saving Private Ryan to help the convey the soldiers emotions in how sick of they were of the war. Commonly physical fights take place to help express emotional pain or anger, these are normally avoided by voicing this anger through these taboo words. For example one can use name calling (bitch, asshole), or curse in the form of a put down (eat shit and die) all spur emotional responses and can help avoid physical confrontations by giving a voice to inner feelings. This is commonly seen in rap songs where many cuss words are used to unveil inner feelings. Such the rap group NWA used

Envision ambulating down the street and then out of the blue someone shouts obscenities predicated on the way people look or because of what they affiliate with. Incidents involving animosity happen everyday, and most are looked at as daily occurrences. With the current state of hate speech laws, there is nothing that could be done to put culpability on the instigator. Hate has a strong connection to United States history. Slaves were a result of being hateful to those who were different, and Jim Crow laws were also a consequence of this hatred. As much time has passed since then, America has become more progressive, although there are still people who are hateful of others for they way they are. Hate speech laws are necessary in the United States and should be passed because passing them would create and foster a more tolerant society, help to decrease the negative risk associated with them, and prevent violent acts of hate which tend to be preceded by hate speech.

Hate speech, what is it? The definition of hate speech, according to Mari J. Matsuda, author of "Assaultive Speech and Academic Freedom, is "…(a word of group of words) of which is to wound and degrade by asserting the inherent inferiority of a group" (151). In my own words hate speech is a humiliation and demeaning slur of words specifically used to disgrace a person for their race, religion, or sexual habits. There is now a controversy if hate speech should be regulated on college campuses or not. I have read a few articles with the author being either for or against regulating hate speech. My opinion is that yes, we should regulate hate speech on college campuses.