Progressive Ideas Have Killed Free Speech Analysis

There are many societal problems in todays world. These problems can range from poverty, crime, to even human right violations. The United States serves as a model country, where many of these problems are not seen or handled with quality efforts. One of the fundamental keys to the United States success is the implement of our first amendment right, freedom of speech. Although many might not understand the power of this right, time and time again it proves its’ importance within our culture. In comparison to unfortunate countries like North Korea, U.S citizens live in a completely different

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech”. Some people in today’s time would argue the first amendment is one of the most important listed in the Bill of Rights. Many forms of speech are protected by the first amendment that one wouldn’t think would be such as flag burning and “adult videos”. Over the years there have been many different court cases that have debated and fought the forms of speech that are protected.

In Nat Hentoff essay, “Should This Student Have Been Expelled?” he debates that freedom of speech should be valued no matter how it is taken by others. The one example that pops out to me is the student at Brown University, Dough Hann. He states many offensive things about several people and is expelled because it was not the first time something like this has happened. Freedom of speech is difficult subject that has many different views on it. The way someone feels is imitated by what we face in everyday life. I do agree that everyone should have freedom of speech, but it should be redirected by not hurting others view in how they interrupt it. It should be approached with a tasteful opinion. We may think that something that we say is not

The first amendment guarantees five basic freedoms to the American citizens. These freedoms are of speech, press, petition, assembly and religion. As all the amendments, the first amendment is intended for use in situations with the government. The first amendment was written by James Madison and was sent to the states to be ratified on September 25, 1789 along with the twelve proposals for the bill of rights.. Then it was officially adopted on December 15, 1791.

Borders of the First Amendment are at the center of the legal debates about free speech and hate speech. While free speech is considered to be a basic right, as the Supreme Court has given the right to free speech. However, when such "free speech" crosses the line and becomes a threat, the courts have stepped in and punished the speaker. First Amendment does not protect free speech that has the intention of doing harm or damage. Many people believe that the First Amendment gives the people right to say whatever they want but it’s not true. There is no hate speech exception to First Amendment. There are some kind of words which are not protected especially the fighting or insulting words or speech in which a person threatens to commit a crime that would result in death, serious injury, or damage is not protected by the First Amendment, instead First Amendment gives the right to fight against injustice, inequality and unfairness. For example Black Lives Matter movement, this movement has every right to express their feelings. The ways they are protesting are protected under the First Amendment. Different treatment is given for different group of people which violates civil rights. Black lives matter is a movement meant to stop anti-black police brutality, racial discrimination and injustice through speech which is protected by First Amendment. The main motive of black live matter is to get their right and get justice against inhuman behavior of white

Freedom of speech is one of the corner stones of American society and is defended vigorously. One huge reason of this defense is the argument where if one small part of freedom of speech is violated or diminished, eventually that will be enough grounds to essentially ban freedom of speech outright. The Slippery Slope. This argument is, at its core, a broad assumption and can be refuted. For one, it is possible for a government to reduce the freedom of speech and go no further, usually due to reasons where what you say could threaten national security and the public welfare in general. Prime example would be that you cannot say “bomb” on a plane. This has not progressed to a new law where we are not allowed to say anything on an airplane.

Writers Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, in their article “The Coddling of the American Mind”, detail the effects that safe spaces and trigger warnings are having on college campuses. They claim that “in the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don’t like” and add they will explain “why that’s disastrous for education and mental health”. Through the use of the word “increasingly”, the writers recognize that not all students are following the damaging trend, but instead it is becoming progressively prevalent and as a result needs to be addressed. Throughout the article, explanations are given for the stance against shielding students from opinions they find oppressive, as well as ways to combat and fix the problem. Through this, the writers hope to promote a college experience where students can feel safe and

The idea of free speech on college campuses and the complications of it stem from those on campuses expressing views that don’t align with popular views. Implications for students who use the idea of free speech as a method for hateful actions and comments should be reprimanded, but the question remains as to whether schools should enforce tougher limitations. The freedom of speech on college campus expands to the freedoms of religion, assembly, press, and protest as well. Freedom of expression allows students to show their own political, social, and cultural views. Removing freedoms of speech and expression have consequences deeper than surface issues. Free speech and hate speech can be classified as different topics and when arguing for one, we can also criticize the other. Free expression and free speech on campuses are crucial for sparking important conversations about equality and social justice, and the suspension of free speech and expression may have dire consequences on college campuses.

Today’s college students are becoming more sensitized to the harshness of the outside world. Instead of learning to be resilient to others’ comments, they are being taught to take offense to any little word that could in some way be connected with a bad experience they might have had, and college administrators and professors are aiding this childish behavior. They are backing this movement to make adults into children. With this new movement to rid college campuses of any speech that may make anyone feel uncomfortable, students are being treated less like adults, and more like elementary children.

First Amendment Freedom of Speech – While we like to point to freedom of speech as the guard dog of our freedom, total freedom of speech has brought with it some unintended consequences. First, all speech is protected, even ugly, hate-filled speech. What’s wrong with letting this speech exist out there? Well, it can cause people to feel and actually be less safe, diminishing the personal freedoms of people who are the targets of this speech.

The college campus has the right to shut down a protest if it may cause a fight. This is said under the category “Fighting Words” in the first amendment. Its states that if the protest may cause the intended audience to commit an act of crime, the protest should be dismissed. The fighting words category also states that a protesters are not allowed to partake in name calling or use derogatory terms toward the directed audience. This was put in place after Chaplinsky v New Hampshire, 1942. This trail took place because the actions of Chaplinsky. Chaplinsky Was passing out pamphlets when the city marshal confronted him. Chaplinsky said some choice words

What are the arguments that support the Supreme Court 's ruling in favor of Phelps?

In the story “Should This Student Have Been Expelled?” by Nat Hentoff was a very good argumentative passage. Hentoff argues that freedom of speech should be valued no matter how offensive it is interpreted by others. Dough Hann abused his freedom of speech when he blurted out “Fuck you niggers” to black students at Brown University. A student asked Hann to stop screaming and Hann yelled “What are you a faggot?” Next, Hann noticed an Israeli flag in the student’s dorm and asked “What are you a Jew?” and shouted, “Fucking Jew!” In my opinion, it was a great decision to expel Dough Hann. He attended Brown University, which means he should have demonstrated a good role model and be respectful. Using bad language and being an alcoholic like Hann

Freedom of speech is the freedom all people have, to express what they consider and express any opinions. It is an ability to express our opinions freely without being punished or censored. All people throughout the world are entitled and must have right to freedom of speech. However, how much do we know about freedom of speech: when did it occur? Does every countries have it? Is there negative and positive sides?

As human beings, we are all born with an entitlement of freedom of speech or synonymously known as freedom of expression as it is a basic human right. It is stated in the Federal Constitution and it is important for us human beings to protect our rights to freedom of speech and expression as it is the backbone for a democratic society. Having the right to express oneself freely without any restrictions is an essential part of what it means to be a free human being. Article 10 in the Federal Constitution states that; (a) every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression; (b) all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms; (c) all citizens have the right to form associations.