The main difference is how each argues. Planned Parenthood takes a more political stand and Doonby reaches towards the audience’s emotion. Doonby refers to the unknown potential that the unborn fetus could possibly have, while the article talks about the aftermath of the abortion and selling of the baby’s body parts for a profit. The word abortion isn’t even mentioned in Doonby, Lucy Mae says that she is going to visit the new doctor in
By not allowing students to develop their own ideas and receive the education they need and deserve, the entire society will suffer from an undereducated population. Anne Neal’s thesis can be applied to any courses taken at Brazosport College, or any college. If our government class was not allowed to learn about all the controversial subjects that government entails, we would all most likely leave the class knowing no more than when we began. The same goes for any course I take at Brazosport College. I am very open to learning about any controversial subject that is brought up through my college career, especially after watching Anne Neal’s speech on academic freedom.
Around the globe many books are banned from schools and libraries because of their content. Though many others disagree with the banning of books, because it takes away freedom of speech. Many books are banned and challenged because their content is considered inappropriate or offensive to the readers. But, others find that it goes against our First Amendment rights when they take away what someone else has written. Butler University also shows other reasons for why books are often times banned.
She states that students are committed to eliminating problems in society by standing up, which takes a lot of strength (Cutterham 2). There were also protests against Condoleezza Rice speaking at Rutgers University because students disagreed with her views.Cutterham also uses the example of O’Neil’s Spectator article. He states that universities should share the goal of protestors: to create an environment where no one feels threatened or belittled. He also includes the example of how student’s protests led to “the temporary disbandment of the London School of Economics’ rugby club” (3) when the club had
Many people presume that Malcolm hated and threatened Caucasian Americans constantly when advocating every African American should go out and arm themselves, form militias of their own. In an interview, however he defines himself stating "No, I said this: That in areas of this country where the government has proven its--either its inability or its unwillingness to protect the lives and property of our people, then it’s only fair to expect us to do whatever is necessary to protect ourselves". He later goes on and says he respects government and laws as well as " I’m not advocating the breaking of any laws. But I say that our people will never be respected as human beings until we react as other normal, intelligent human beings do. And this country came into existence by people who were tired of tyranny and oppression and exploitation and the brutality that was being inflicted upon them by powers higher than they, and I think that it is only fair to expect us, sooner or later, to do likewise."
Even though she plays a minor role, Vonnegut uses her as another way to speak directly to the reader, vocalizing his opinions on war. In this instance she states… “You were just babies in the war—like the ones upstairs! […] But you’re not going to write it that way are you? […] You’ll pretend you’re man instead of babies…” (14). She goes on to say that war will continue because of the human tendency to glamorize war in the media.
Football players should not be punished for their opinion and issue in which they protest in the United States because it brings awareness to society issues, use social status, and even though people disagree that the protest should not happen during the National Anthem. However, it the best time to show the fans what issues they are protesting. This act of protest is nothing new to America, but it has only just become an outrage due, to the involvement of the president and many other average citizens that claim it to be an unfit way to protest. The first instance of this act dates all the way back to World War II, when the Supreme Court voted down a demand that the flag should be saluted during the Pledge of Allegiance (Sachs 1). Then time goes by until 1996 when basketball star Abdul-Rauf was suspended for the length of one game, due to him refusing to stand for the national anthem for a religious purpose.
In addition, Martin Luther King Jr. was also fighting for a group of people by using civil disobedience. King writes, “Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court’s decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, it is rather strange and paradoxical to find us consciously breaking laws” (221). King say’s how people against his ideas wonder how he can demanded new laws when he is breaking others. King uses civil disobedience to disobey unjust laws that focus on bringing down minorities, in order to achieve his goal of equality. For both Yousafzai and King they had to use civil disobedience to convince people who were against their causes.
For the sake of campus protestors and their professors across the country, it’s time to make something clear: there’s no such thing as hate speech. That should go without saying, since freedom of speech and free inquiry is supposed to be what college is all about. But the recent spate of violent student protests, from the University of California at Berkeley to Middlebury College in Vermont, have been met with a collective shrug from an alarming number of college students, professors, and administrators who seem to be under the impression that violence is okay so long as its purpose is to silence “hate speech.” By hate speech, they mean ideas and opinions that run afoul of progressive pieties. Do you believe abortion is the taking of human life? That’s hate speech.
Many Americans had experienced let downs by the government, therefore, believed in a need for change. King gave speeches to help motivate the voices of the innocents who had been treated badly by policeman or for the color of their skin. This text fits into revolution traditions because Kings, marchers had set goals to accomplish which was to get rid of segregation and eliminate unjust laws. The protest also had a concept and rules that had to be followed which was not to hit back or be violent when hit. Because of King people are allowed to go to different school no matter what color skin they are.
Once within a public area, pictures are allowed to be taken of you with or without your consent, but even so, many of the students failed to understand and grasp this idea. A large group of the students who were surrounding the journalist believed that he was disrespecting them for being too close and personal while trying to take photos of their tents, which can lead into the forms of ethics. What may be perfectly ethical to one person may not be the same to another, simply because of there being no standard for values between individuals. In the video, which can be found on youtube.com, the journalist appeared to be respectful to the protestors even despite the stressful situation. Surrounding, yelling, and pushing others, whether they be a journalist or not, on a public space while asking for respect can be seen as wrong to some, but it appeared as though the protesters showed a disregard for such views.
In fact, the prospect of guns in the classroom is more likely to cause professors to keep the conversation tepid and avoid certain controversies; everyone else will watch what they say, how they say it and to whom. This would be quite the opposite of the open and transformative exchange that universities have made it their mission to offer. There is a further point. As we saw in the aftermath of the Ferguson and Staten Island police incidents, and earlier with the Occupy Wall Street movement, university campuses are places where political protest takes root. Perhaps colleges are not quite the haven for political protest that they once were -- like, say, in the 1960 's.