The idea of human rights has been altered and been highly debated in the United States. Often our citizens, and even our own representatives, are stuck arguing over hot-button topics such as new gun control laws, access to universal healthcare in poverty-stricken communities, and even free speech, especially that of a controversial nature. The ambiguity of what our founding fathers believed our inalienable human rights as citizens under the United States constitution should be today is closely tied with the structure and disparities between social class lines. Currently, our government places more focus on the lower side of the socioeconomic class structure. Just recently, free speech on college campuses has become a hot topic of debate, sparking the political turmoil of maintaining free speech as a right for all citizens, and perhaps even pushing through new precautions to protect it.
The declaration of Independence clearly states the United States government is obligated to allow citizens to enjoy “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,” and do everything within its power to uphold these values within the lives of each and every citizen (US 1776). The government may never infringe on these rights, and is even restricted with the first ten amendments of the constitution, known as The Bill of Rights. According to John Locke, a famous philosopher whose influence reached greatly into the hearts of our founding fathers and the constitution, the main purpose of government is to protect an individual’s “property”, which is then later defined as a person’s “life, liberty, and estate” (US 1689). This was the revival of the western interpretation of human rights, which is summarized as a person’s underlying feelings and personal well-being. These values require governmental protection, and grievances must be addressed fairly and equally across the nation. The definition of property is closely tied to the quote in the constitution, if you were to replace the part estate with “pursuit of Happiness”. The idea the pursuit of enjoyment is part of our civil liberties as citizens under the United States government. Our government’s continued support and protection of this civil liberty is an intrinsic value in the
With a wide variety of people on colleges campuses, it is almost impossible to please everybody; whether it comes to class times, bus schedules, or grading rules, somebody is upset. As well as these smaller issues, more controversial arguments come into play. One of these arguments is against free speech zones on college campuses. These zones restrict speech to a specific area on campus, however, still allowing any type of group to express their beliefs to anybody passing. Some claim these zones as unconstitutional because it restricts a student’s right to free speech. However, others view the zones as helpful in controlling protests and current tensions on campus. Open speech across campus is incredibly difficult to monitor because of the enormous size of current day campuses and the immense amount of different views. In the past, there have been situations relating to violent protesting and negative speech across campuses. Because of this, campuses have begun enforcing free speech zones in which students and faculty may verbally express their beliefs.
Lawrence sheds light upon the very turbulent issue of the First Amendment right to the Freedom of speech in contrast to the inequality caused by its misuse through racially bias speech. The author states that the University officials should endorse some sort policy that will protect the rights of those who are victimized by this “racial nuisance,” while at the same time not censoring our constitutional right of free speech, “I am troubled by the way the debates has been framed in response to the recent surge of racist incidents on college and university campuses and in response universities attempts to regulate harassing speech” (Lawrence,65). Continually, Lawrence defines the set of ideals that the First Amendment was based on, particularly; equality. He goes on to show the audience that this very balance is
In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson expresses unalienable rights as a ideal for the US government. It has been argued on National Public Radio that life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are essential to America’s government(Doc B). Citizens need to be able to depend on unalienable rights without doubt that the government can take them away because they are rights citizens are born with. Sullivan believed the government should “place(s) liberty at the center of its concerns” in order to give the people the rights they deserve. This shows that unalienable rights are very important to the U.S. government in order to give the people the rights they deserve; however, it is not the most important one to the American society.
Derek Bok argues that American dedication to democracy is embodied in the Frist Amendment and that the freedoms granted in this Amendment are the building blocks of dialogues that contribute to cohesive communities born out of differences. The problem, however, according to Bok, is the difficulty of balancing the protection of these freedoms on campuses and universities where reasoned expression of diverse ideas is encouraged. Bok offers the suggestion that rather than attempt to stifle expression by imposing penalties for what might be considered offensive speech, “speak with those who perform insensitive acts and try to help them understand the effects of their action on others” (69). While this suggestion might imply a reasoned and
For centuries Universities have been a place to freely voice your opinion and debate with others. These institutions have been relatively safe harbors for debating social issues and exercising the individual's civil rights. However, current students seem to be the exact opposite, and the constitutional principle of free speech seems under siege. “Colleges and universities in the United States have retreated from strong historical support for free speech, including the dis-invitation of speakers, promulgation of speech codes that prohibit what is deemed "offensive speech," and students protesting the participation of politically unpopular speakers on campus” (Eliott)
Hate crimes are an epidemic that plagues college campuses across the United States. Often, the instigators of hate crimes hide behind their rights allotted to them in the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. In fact, this argument has actually been found to be a valid one in the eyes of many court systems. The policies put in place by institutions to prevent hate crimes, actually have been found to encourage them. These policies have been found to be a tricky slope for universities. At what point are Constitutional Rights being infringed upon? At what point does one go in order to protect others and encourage inclusion and unity? The surge and reduction in hate crimes on college campuses can often be traced back
The Declaration of Independence states that every citizen is granted the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Furthermore, it marks the turning point in American history where the United States gained its independence from the British Government. The Declaration of Independence argues for the protection of people’s, and to a certain extent, negates government power. Embedded in the Declaration, it states “whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends (revolution), it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it” and “it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security” (Week 2. Foundations and Contradictions ppt.). However, referring back to this passage, in the Declaration of Independence, which is perceived to be a well-respected document that ensures each person’s right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, we can argue that this passage is not applicable to all
America’s history is filled with constant arguing, debating, and bickering. Because America is so diverse and full of people with differing opinions, it is important that everyone is given a voice. The Bill of Rights is opened with the 1st amendment, which consists of the freedom of speech, religion, petition, press, and assembly. These are the cornerstones of American society, and the freedom to assemble has guided America to where it is today. This promise was a direct response to many events in colonial America, has been defended in court as shown is the case of the Village of Skokie vs. the National Socialist Party, and was pushed to its limit at the White Nationalist Rally in Charlottesville, yet the persistence of this right proves how controversy succumbs to the freedom of expression.
Centuries ago in American society, individuals were not granted the free will to act and speak freely. First Amendment rights allowed citizens to do so. On a historical outlook, the oppressed fought for the rights of various groups in the United States. Although laws and situations evolve, groups in America continue to face inequality and issues with freedom of speech. There is room for further improvement; freedom for all citizens needs to be fulfilled. The impression of being free is what gives the United States the ideology of being a part of a democracy. Recent events have revealed issues with freedom of speech and questioning about what kinds of speech is protected. In order to close the gap in
Free Speech on Campus incorporates arguments in favor of promoting broad speech protections on campus as well as arguments in favor of restricting free speech to protect the learning experience of students. Ultimately, the authors of the book take the side of supporting broad speech protections on campus in that as long as professional character is maintained, all ideas and views, protected by the 1st amendment, should be able to be expressed on college campuses, no matter how offensive or how uncomfortable they make people feel. While those in favor of restricting speech argue that students should be protected from hateful, discriminatory, or intolerant speech as a means of protecting the educational setting, the authors maintain that the
Roughly 600 years ago, Columbus came and “discovered” America although there were people currently living there. Europeans soon claimed the land as theirs and called themselves Americans. Today, although people have made a living in the United States, they are being sent back because of their race and where they came from. The ban of people from the Middle East entering the United States took the world by shock although Donald Trump has talked about it before his presidency. Many people believed that he was not going to be able to do it since it violates the United States Constitution. It also infringes with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and managed to still get away with it.
From the 1950’s to today, the Supreme Court has expressed their view on the necessity of free speech on university campuses through the many cases where they decided to further protect free speech for everyone involved. In 1957, their decision
One of the most valued amendments written in the U.S. Constitution is the First Amendment, which guarantees Americans freedom of speech. Individuals view the restriction of this right to be “unamerican”. Unfortunately, over the years colleges and universities have experienced an increase of hate speech. Victims of this type of crime may suffer from emotional and psychological distress. Due to this, restrictions have been placed on the ability to speak freely (Garrett). An ongoing debate has been placed in the hands of many people regarding whether Americans should be entitled to speak in an expressive way or if schools should focus on the safety of their students (Darden). Colleges should restrict hateful speech on campus regardless of
In 1776, Thomas Jefferson changed John Locke’s original words of ‘life, liberty, and property’ to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ to emphasise that these natural rights are ensured to a person and that, to ensure these rights, governments are established among the people; the governments established in the states gain their power from the approval of those being governed. Essentially, the Declaration of Independence articulates a philosophy the American government should be based off of and the list of grievances demonstrate how the former leader of the American citizens did not successfully govern them. [add to… lao tzu & aristotle] In the pursuance of a fair government, a leader owes to his society the ability to govern justly,
One of the biggest issues that has been present within our society for many years is civil liberties.