The Positive And Positive Implications Of Freedom Of Speech

Neil Gaiman once said, “The current total of countries in the world with First Amendments is one. You have guaranteed the freedom of speech. Other countries don’t have that.” At the time of the amendments’ creation, a vast majority of operating countries had not yet granted their people such freedoms. Granting every citizen of the United States this right seemed to have been an important landmark in this nation’s history. Along with others, this right is declared to the people in the first amendment of the constitution. The first amendment is the most important because it grants people freedom of speech, prohibits prior restraint, and declares the right to peaceable assembly.

Under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution of December 1791, guaranteed the civil liberty of freedom of speech. It outlined that congress is not allowed to make any laws that may bridge a citizen’s freedom of speech, religion, press, and the right to assemble. This style of liberty gives all Americans the opportunity to express their thoughts openly without being shut down by the government. For example, there have been a great deal of protest the current president. Although, he is the president and should be respected Americans still have the right to display their opinions

Being expression one of the most important rights of the people to maintain a connected society right to speech should be accepted to do so. The first amendment is one of the most fundamental rights that individuals have. It is fundamental to the existence of democracy and the respect of human dignity. This amendment describes the principal rights of the citizens of the United States. If the citizens were unable to criticize the government, it would be impossible to regulate order. By looking freedom of speech there is also freedom of assembly and freedom of press that are crucial for the United States democracy.

Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law

America has grown as a country due to changes being made possible with having Freedom of Speech. Alas, there are times where there must be a line drawn to protect American citizens under the first amendment. Sometimes cases brought to the Supreme Court push the boundaries on what people think is right and wrong regarding to Freedom of Speech. Brandenburg v. Ohio is a case that focuses on how we came up with

The Unites States is known for our revolutionary thinking and just legal system. Our constitution establishes fundamental laws and guarantees basic rights for citizens in our national government. I find the First Amendment of the constitution quite interesting. It 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 right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” This law establishes a standard for guaranteeing ones right of expression and free speech without prosecution from the law. Freedom of speech has been a subject of discussion for many years. Since democracy was established to provide safety and rights, the First Amendment has been one of the most important rights in our constitution. In other countries, they have certain levels of tolerance when it comes to executing this right. Sometimes freedom of speech can become more harmful than helpful and many people have been vocal on their opinion whether or not it should be limited in certain circumstances. This amendment was put in place because prior to our free nation, being legally prosecuting for you own expression of religion or preference in politics was not uncommon. This revolutionary idea of immunity from persecution, created a society that was more tolerant towards other cultures, religions and traditions. This tolerance and freedom that the right gave us proved to be largely beneficial for a society as a whole. Even though we are granted this privilege many people aren’t’ as lucky to exercise, we must be aware that this right can also be seen as a double-edged sword, that can create problems and outcries if others feel their personal liberties aren’t being honored in the same regard. This right may seem simple and self-explanatory, but there are common misconceptions and challenges that us as a democracy face. Even though freedom of speech is a defining and fundamental right in our country, it’s components are largely controversial at times.

The United States Constitution grants American citizens the freedom of speech. This single line in the First Amendment has been a staple of American culture since its ratification on December 15, 1791 (Constitution Center, 2018). The Founders recognized the significance of this freedom and the power it had to shape a young nation. It was George Washington who declared-“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter” (Global Research, 2016). The legal definition of this vision is “the right to express information, ideas, and opinions- free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). This sole clause has been the subject

Many people come to the United States looking for freedom and liberty and where their essential rights are protected under the Constitution. However, freedom should not be taken for granted as for every rule there may be limits. The First Amendment of the United States’ Constitution states 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; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (Corwin 48). In other words, the First Amendment granted freedom of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly, and petition. The First Amendment is clear enough for anyone to comprehend and process easily; however, people sometimes misunderstand their rights by doing what their First Amendment right does not protect, especially when it comes to freedom of speech. Seven of the most important law cases in the United States’ history are what shaped the American’s society and allowed people to hopefully know and recognize their limits and restrictions when it comes to their speech whether it was a literal speech or a symbolic speech.

Free speech is the backbone that holds democracy together.  Without a free speech, ideas would not be challenged, governments would not be kept in check, and citizens would not be free.  John Stuart Mill said once that, “If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person then he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”( Roleff, 21). The right to free speech is essential to “egalitarian democracy,”(Tsesis) however, this right is not absolute and must be limited in certain situations.

The first amendment of the United States forbears the government from, among other things, impairing or abridging either free speech or a free press. Quite possibly

The First Amendment states that a person has the right to freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of press. Although these things are clearly stated in the constitution, these rights are beginning to be compromised, and taken from the American people. Many people in America are not able to say their views in fear of offending someone else with the comments. This is a problem that many people are facing especially on the right side of the political spectrum. Some people believe that people should not be able to speak their minds in public places, but that is wrong because the constitution states that any person has the right to say what they want to.

Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, “Every step we take towards making the State our Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master.” The First Amendment to the Unites States Constitution has been under much scrutiny and had much heat of late. Returning to its pure roots, National Socialist Party of America v. Village of Skokie describes how the U. S. Government must allow freedom speech, even if it is evil, to protect the democracy.

The first amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America can often be taken for granted. In many third-world countries, the idea of freedom of speech is in the back of people’s minds, but almost never brought to the forefront of issues facing the country and government. In recent years, this has become especially evident in the Middle East. In the United States, we are shown a display of the harsh authoritative rule of governments

Freedom of speech had a link of positive impacts to the world. One positive impact would be the citizens questioning the government about their personal interests and opinion on free speech. This means that before freedom of speech was questioned, many citizens did not have a voice. The government was not concerned with increasing individual’s voices based on personal opinions and beliefs. When citizens began to question the government, the government had not one motive behind not giving individuals the opportunity to speak freely. This arouse more questioning and thoughts amongst citizens and government officials. The United States implemented the first amendment which is applied to all state and local governments. No one is restricted or

The freedom to be able to express your own opinion is an ideology that is supported by many, however the act of promoting harm or hate is where freedom should be restricted. Freedom of speech is a right for citizens of many countries, but these citizens may agree or disagree on what is allowed to be expressed. Many people share the belief that they can say anything they want because their freedom entitles them to express any opinion they would like. In contrast, many people believe that you shouldn’t be able to say anything you want and that there should be restrictions on the type of things that you can say. In the novel On Liberty by John Stuart Mill, Mill argues that freedom of speech should be limited if and when it is harming other people in the process. Mill explains this argument by stating that silencing an unpopular opinion is unjustifiable because in order to successfully express your opinion, you must listen to the criticism. I agree with Mill’s position regarding freedom of speech based on the fact that he doesn’t support hate speech, and that there should be reasonable limits on freedom of speech in order to have an ideal democratic society. This essay will outline the justifications for Mill’s argument surrounding freedom of speech, the limitations that Mill believes should be set on freedom of speech as well as the assumptions that his argument depends on, and finally my personal viewpoint on Mill’s argument. Freedom of speech is a right that should be guaranteed to every citizen around the world, however when this speech negatively affects or harms other humans in the process, it is thereby considered hate speech which must be condemned.