More handpicked essays just for you.
An essay on the first constitutional amendment of freedom of speech
According to the U.S. Constitution, the First Amendment protects the right to free speech
An essay on the first constitutional amendment of freedom of speech
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
How Free Is Speech? The First Amendment prohibits Congress from implementing laws which bar freedom of speech and press. This vital piece of the U.S. Constitution helped build one of the more forward thinking nations of today. America is a melting pot of eclectic cultures, but rights and privilege do not always equal respect. Every citizen is protected by constitutional law, but the Supreme Court must decipher free speech from hate speech as the latter is unlawful. The end goal of any regulation is to maintain order without sacrificing anyone’s personal dignity, but implementation requires action in addition to written word. A recent example of the Supreme Court’s due diligence came with an offensive label in sports media. The Washington Redskins are a professional football team within the NFL, and although seemingly archaic to some, many Native Americans still find the name offensive. In response to this case, the Supreme Court ruled that “…the ultimate decision is based on whether the evidence shows that a substantial composite of the Native American population found the term ‘Redskins’ to be disparaging when the respective registrations issued” (N. Irwin, 2014). The Redskins were able to keep their name in the end as there was not enough of an offended group to eventually represent themselves. …show more content…
An article from nearly three decades ago asks if it “...is free speech to lure children with images they've been taught to trust, cartoon images, to a product the surgeon general has called an addiction that can lead to death?” (G. Desroches, 1994). The Supreme Court ruled that these types of advertisements are relegated to commercial speech as opposed to hate speech. Although cigarettes have been proven fatal and offensive, their advertisers have carte blanche within the realm of commercial
The first Amendment of the United States Constitution says; “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.”[1] Our fore fathers felt that this statement was plain enough for all to understand, however quite often the United States government deems it necessary to make laws to better define those rights that are stated in the Constitution. Today the framers would be both encouraged and discouraged by our modern interpretation the First Amendment the United States Constitution.
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 respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”. Although this amendment gave people the right express thier opinions, it still rests in one’s own hands as how far they will go to exercise that right of freedom of speech.
Sports organizations that have ethnic team names and mascots have been a controversial hot topic for decades. Professional sports franchises like the Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, and Washington Redskins have maintained significant presence and fan base in their respective leagues, but disputes over the perceived racial offensiveness of their names has surrounded them. Some Native American activist groups and political figures think ethnic team names and mascots are disrespectful to their culture and defame the historical legacy of their ancestors. They view the name “Redskins” as a racial slur, and the cartoonish-looking Chief Wahoo mascot for the Cleveland Indians as mockery rather than flattery. Despite the fact that sports franchises know their brand is offending ethnic groups, they have refused to change their team names. Native Americans have experienced psychological distress, lower self-esteem, and a lower sense of achievement because of the offensive and stereotypical names/logos of these teams ("Washington Redskins: Do Offensive Team Names Endanger Public Health?"). This begs the question, should sports teams with potentially offensive names and mascots be required to change their identities in order to be more racially sensitive and politically correct?
Stanley Fish states in his essay “The Free-Speech Follies”, “The modern American version of crying wolf is crying First Amendment” (496). The First Amendment is made up of five basic freedoms given to the United States citizens that consist of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to hold a peaceful protest, freedom of press, and the right to protest. Within the Constitution there are no words that state the rights include for society to speak rudely to, or about, others. The article “Freedom of Speech” explains, “Slander consists of orally making and libel consists of publishing false statements that are damaging to the reputation of another” (1). People are allowed to have their own beliefs and opinions; however, they should not
The 1st amendment was put into play of the Bills of Rights in December 1791. It was placed to protect the freedoms of religion, speech, petition, and press. The freedom of speech is one of the protection clauses that people really enjoy the most. Although there are some certain limitations to the freedom of speech so some things do not carried away. The 1st amendment protects speech in so many ways that allow the people to speak up and voice their opinions or thoughts in ways that many would have thought was illegal or against the law. It allowed people to voice their opinions by in some circumstances by not speaking at all, use offensive words and phrases in political messages, and overall allow individuals to express themselves without the
Cigarette advertisements reflect society’s love-hate relationship with tobacco products through the ages. During its heyday of popularity, cigarette advertisements were not governed in any way, allowing tobacco companies to use any means necessary to sell their products including advertising during popular children’s television shows. This practice came under scrutiny around 1964 when the Surgeon General released its first report on “smoking and health.” This report stated that smoking may be hazardous to your health. Soon to follow the release of this report was a ban on all cigarette advertisements on television and radio.
The First Amendment 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 to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" (First Amendment Oct. 20, 2013). But "the First Amendment does not protect all speech from government censorship, and it does not prevent private non-government entities from censoring. Years of US Supreme Court decisions have identified exceptions to the general rule that the governments in the United States cannot censor" (Censorship Copyright © 2002). American citizen's right of freedom of speech should be held in the highest integrity and any kind of censorship of free speech should not be allowed because it take away those rights. However, censorship has been going on for centuries.
Two ideas that were similar and that were shared by the sources are that the first amendment guarantees freedom of speech. Source #3 and source #4 explain how they would harm innocent people and would accomplish nothing positive. Source #3 proves that it is good for us to have freedom to say what we want but that there should also be limits to what we have the right to say. Source #3 states, “ The First Amendment to the United States Bill of Rights guarantees freedom of speech. But what if a person were to shout “Fire!” in a crowded movie theater when there was no fire at all ? The decision to do such a thing would put innocent people in a harm’s way while accomplishing nothing positive.” What is stated above shows that it would harm people by them assuming there is really fire and panic when there actually isn’t anything. Source #4 explains how all our freedoms are important and how we can hurt
"Preventing or punishing speech… is a clear violation of the First Amendment." (Censorship. Opposing Viewpoints by, G...
As I started to read Hate Speech on Campus, the first sentence is a quote from the First Amendment “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech.” The two words that are stressed from this quote is no law. Obviously the writers of the constitution were trying to protect the future generation from losing power to their freedom of speech. But, because of the vagrant misuse of speech that we have in the world today, has everyone looking for a way to censor it.
Freedom of speech is the very First Amendment in the Constitution. All people should have freedom of speech. No matter the person or the place they should have freedom of speech. Old or young, short or tall, everyone should have it. So, therefor schools should not have freedom of speech. The next few paragraphs will tell you why.
AMHERST -- Free speech is often subject to debate, and at the University of Massachusetts, a federal lawsuit is being filed against the university for violating the free speech of a campus group. Students weighed in on the ongoing controversy.
All people have a rights, this is so important in modern society. The main legal document is a constitution.and constitution says the whole person have own rights. These are the rights right of life, right of Dignity and also right of speech.
However, an instance where freedom of speech should be protected at all costs would be when this particular free speech benefits a country or society’s progress. As this freedom of speech is to be protected at all cost, it means that the speaker could be risking their lives or their families’ lives for a cause that they believe in. An example would be Malala Yousafzai, a 17-year-old Pakistani. As the Taliban began to take control over her hometown, Swat valley, they started to ban girls from attending school. Malala felt that this not only took away her education rights, but also, other girls in parts of Pakistan under the rule of the Taliban. Therefore, she decided to speak up against the Taliban, standing up for the other girls who are unable
Freedom of speech is the concept that people can spread their ideas, thoughts or interpret others' opinions freely without humiliating their religions, reputations. People have right to receive or impart information without any interference by governments and other people. Furthermore, freedom of speech is the most precious human right that belongs to everyone so that each of us has a right to freely express ourselves either orally or through writing and also through art as well as internet. However, “when it stands on opposition to other individuals’ interests or public interests , such as privacy ,reputation or national security , restrictions and limitations of freedom of speech should be taken into account”(Sun 153). Despite the common idea, there should be some restrictions on freedom of speech in order to eradicate hate speech, protecting national security and protecting minors.