The Appropriate Use of Freedom of Speech Essay

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

Everyone is born free in this world and those are only the situations in which they are born, that make one slave or the ruler. In spite of social status and the economic standing of a being everyone wants and should be allowed to express their views, feelings and ideas. It is in nature of humans to experience the wonders of the world and to have the urge to observe and think about the wonders and express the ideas in a certain ways. Another thing that is also certain about the nature of the people that different people look at the same thing in different ways. American constitution is the one that respects the people and about the views and ideas of the people and their right to live and express their ideas freely. The constitution that was made by our fathers not only discusses the issues that are pertaining on collective level, but also, about the common issues and concerns of the people and one of them is freedom of speech. It is also the right of every free person in this world to have freedom of speech and to have his own personal standing. Constitution of United States also considers the right of the people to play their part and have their own view about everything that is happening around them and gives them the right to express them. This paper is also focused on the issue of freedom of speech, but, is targeted to how this right is being guaranteed and exercised at workplaces.

I have an idea!  How about we let everyone freely speak their minds about issues and ideas.  Some will be better than others will of course, but the outcome will be a compilation of everyone’s best thoughts.  Everyone that is, except you.  We, meaning the country, decided that whatever it is that you have to say isn’t all that important and it is recommended that you keep all your thoughts to yourself as it is hard not to be offensive to everyone at the same time.  By offensive I mean to displease someone.  In general, no one really likes what you have to say.  Therefore it has been decided that you and only you will be silenced.

Since the post-french revolution era, a fundamental tenet of the West has been the right to free speech - crucial for a successful democracy. The first ammendment - apart from protecting the right to profess and practice ones religion or ideology, it also ensures that such an expression precludes from any sort of repecursions. A third entity included in the first ammendment is the right to be heard, the opinion to be heard by the masses and the greivances to the government, which is essential to the smooth working of the society. Thus the first ammendment ensures that the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly and petition are protected. The idea of imposing limits on rights, ensures the liberties of another individual is not transgressed in the process of exercising ones own. To the very end, the supreme court has set limits on free speech identifying the threat to disruption of normal functionality of school or existing community standards.

  No matter how fervently someone believes in the justice of his cause, suppression of the free exchange of ideas is failure at best or downright wrong. The power or might behind an idea does not make the idea right. Many powerful people throughout history have been wrong. Few people, if any, would judge "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" to be subversive or wrong. In 1939 Ambassador Kennedy was so caught up in the fears of the times that he was willing to use the power of his money to protect the world against a film. When people are caught up in the movements of their time, all people must be extra zealous to guard and encourage freedom of expression. Otherwise, a mob mentality reigns, and people

It is known that society upholds both moral and political rights. These can contradict themselves or come into conflict depending on the society and the people in it. Moral rights depend on the culture and general thought of a certain type of society. On the other hand, political rights depend on the government’s decision of making a moral right a political right in itself. While moral rights are decided by culture or religion, political rights are national and non-changing throughout a certain country. Free speech in the U.S. is a political right that has its own limitations. Someone may be able to express their feeling and opinions as long as they do not inflict or suggest harm to the other people in the society. Whereas free speech

Not as distinguished of a topic, but one of the things that puts freedom of speech under the greatest risk is feelings. The entire stemming problem of protests and anti-protests would be the clashing of ideologies, but the stemming problem of censorship lies in people’s feelings. Feelings are the main driving force that identifies hate speech, and it is why there is an outrage with political correctness. As a society, we began to slowly drift from our protections, and because it has the ability to hurt other people in the slightest way, personal rights and freedoms are slowly yet surely being stripped away. An example of this can be seen in this excerpt,

Kneeling during the American national anthem that has been picking up a lot of attention recently. The protest began to point out police brutality and inequality has received many reactions good and bad. The NFL has seen its fair share of players kneeling and even the MLB has one player who started kneeling but one league where you will not see players kneeling is the NBA because have placed rules on such action.

Freedom from Britain was won in seventeen seventy-six. The United States, since being freed from Britain, has issued many rights and freedoms. One of the many freedoms is the freedom of speech. Without thought, every single person in the United States uses freedom of speech every day. As most things, people have disagreements on when, or if, the freedom of speech is taken too far. Sometimes, this right is taken away from someone or is used against them to hurt them. Americans have the right to freedom of speech; therefore, people should be able to post what they choose in their social media accounts without fear of punishment or retribution.

Finally, freedom of speech is an important aspect within the democratic government and in NSCS it is also important. The democratic government is for the people so it only makes sense that the people have the freedom to express themselves. According to Plato, “Freedom: Surely you’d hear a democratic city say that this is the finest thing it has, so that as a result it is the only city worth living in for someone c who is by nature free” (562 c-d). Freedom is considered a privilege to some individuals because not everyone has the freedom of speech. Moreover, it is important for them to

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is one of the amendments contained in the Bill of Right which is widely debated. It is a constitutional guarantee that protects citizens and limits heavy-handed government influence or restrictions on a citizen's rights. This paper focuses on the free speech clause of the First Amendment. This clause reads "that Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech or of the press". The First Amendment states that the government may not infringe on the right of a citizen's freedom of speech by imposing civil liability on an individual or organizations based on what they write or say. However, there are exceptions to this law, defamation, True threats and fighting words are among the few types of speech not protected by the First Amendment. Most often exceptions to this amendment are a result of court cases as the Supreme Court is somewhat reluctant to restrict the clause any further. In cases like the New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964, defamation, or false, reputation-damaging statements are not covered as free speech.

Evidently, Schmitt believes there is a limit to dangerous speeches that influence others to violence. However, the author argues that the government is not doing enough to limit terrorism in the country and suggest a new law since the current is too broad. Although he is aware that civil libertarians would not appreciate the idea of a law that regulates freedom of speech, despite the fact that is being misused by dangerous and malevolent people, he stills believe it is important to intervene, since, it is the government obligation and commitment to protect the lives and property of citizens as Schmitt state very lucid.

‘Harvard University recently denied admission to at least 10 students over demeaning internet activity. The specific cause to these students having their admission rescinded is that they violated the University’s Principles of Community and Student Code of Conduct by sending Facebook messages that include racist and sexually offensive images. These messages are far from being good and virtuous as required when applying for admission and agreed through the university honor code,’ (Kamnetz, 2017). The question posed in the argument is whether their online conduct can be held against them as a justified reason for non-admission to the university and if it is justified, does it go against the First Amendment right of exercising free speech?

Freedom of speech is the right of one’s' right to express and communicate their ideas, opinion, and beliefs. As a result, nobody should fear being reprimanded, punished or expurgated by the society and perhaps the government at large. In most cases, it is done to attract mass attention from the community. It is entirely synonymous to seeking freedom of denied privileges such as an inappropriate distribution of public resources and side-lining of the minority among others.

After enactment of Constitution, many laws related to press were challenged before the court. In Srinivasa Bhat v. State of Madras, K. Madhava Menon v. State of Bombay, Avanti Press 1950, Amar Nath v. State of Punjab, Romesh Thapar v. Chief Secretary of Patna, Tara Singh v. the State of Punjab, Fram Nusserwanji v. State of Bombay, Chandardeo v. State of Bihar, Tozam-mal v. Government of Bengal, etc., the laws related to press ultra vires to the constitution were quashed.