Based on the first amendment which 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.”. We the citizens of the United States have the freedom to choose and practice our religion, freedom of speech, freedom of press and freedom of petition. Although this amendment seems to be beneficial for the general public it actually does more harm than good. I do not believe that there is in fact a such thing as freedom. Freedom means the power to act, speak or think as one warns without hindrance or restraint. In today’s society we don’t not have freedom because of laws. …show more content…
If one breaks the laws, there are consequences that they face. If there were no laws, then freedom would exist. The general public does not have the right to define freedom because the ruling class owns and defines what freedom is. Freedom is neither tangible nor obtainable because according to B. F. Skinner he stated that “People identify the state of absolute freedom as one in which aversive control is absent: that is, if there is no apparent oppression, then people imagine themselves free”. I agree with Skinner because the general public is nothing more than “Happy Slaves”, we are molded by hidden controls (laws) and don’t even realize it. Therefore, freedom is an illusion. For example, if we wanted to use our freedom of speech toward law enforcement we would face consequences for disrespecting an authority. Although, the first amendment is supposed to protect us, it does not excuse us from hindrance or consequences. The illusion that we have freedom is merely something created by the ruling power because they create and determine what actions the general public are able to do according to the