The Ninth Amendment states that “the enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” (U.S. Constitution). This means that the Ninth Amendment is not actually distributing any rights, and is indeed just talking about the other amendments. This all encompassing amendment limits the government from reaching out and grabbing any small detail that may not have been mentioned in the Constitution and using it to expand in power. This Amendment is quite vital as it allows retained rights of the people thus stating other rights do exist even if they are not really mentioned in the Constitution and violation of those right can still
Still, if a judge grants immunity testifying is mandatory but nothing said will be used against you. Free expression protects us from the government. Obviously the benefits outweigh the costs, but, the negative aspects are remedied through limitations on free expression so as not to interfere with a person?s life, liberty, and property. The right not to speak is protected through various Amendments in the Constitution most noticeably Amendment 1. It is through these guidelines that free expression has become fundamental law and establishes a truly free society.
Many people think the definition of Freedom of Speech is “free speech” even though they are restrictions to it. The First Amendment does not mean you can say anything you wish to at any time or place. Some spoken words or statements can be harmful or threatening to one another and that is prohibited in the United States. The definition of Freedom of Speech needs to be redefined due its frequent misuse of the term today. All people in America, no matter if you are a child or an adult, needs to acknowledge the restrictions to what you say in public.
He is but one simple reason ambiguous: Because freedom is a multidimensional concept itself. The freedom to express the opinion is legally taken as negative freedom: The state may not work to suppress opinions his power or violence. This can be called liberal freedom of speech: The ability to express his or her opinion may be restricted by any form of coercion. Following this discussion is often pointed to a misunderstanding: Just because the state should prevent anyone from expressing his or her opinion that meant not that the private not likely. The fundamental right does not imply that one should write letters to the editor, comments on the net should not be deleted or social networks unpopular content should not delete because it could not restrict the freedom of expression.
I agree with with exercising your right to freedom of speech. I believe we should have the right to freedom of speech and we shouldn’t be censored from what we can say and where we can say it. In my opinion this amendment is one of the most valuable ones. This amendment allows you to speak your mind and lets you express your ideas to the world. The reason i think freedom of speech shouldn 't be censored is because we use it in everyday life.
In the essay written by John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, the topic of freedom of speech is discussed. First off I’d like to discuss how free speech is considered to be an advantage of living in North America and many other countries as well. But is it really? The government technically cannot put any restrictions on speech, because they can’t physically restrain people from saying something. The only thing that the government can do is invoke punishments and consequences for people who say things that the government does not want to be said for whatever reason.
The interests of these individuals as well as the value of their life are viewed as being inherently less important than the interests and lives of the reference group. From a liberal standpoint (and the standpoint of many non-liberals as well), it is important that every individual has the right to equal existence amongst their fellow human beings. Therefore, Altman’s justification for regulation of hate speech appeals to an intrinsically valuable liberal belief. Altman’s prescription not only appeals to the concerns ... ... middle of paper ... ...ing its targets down, therefore people must learn to successfully overcome the feelings that it intends to induce. Like Rauch says, people must not try to eradicate hate speech, rather criticize and try to correct it.
The article “Freedom of Speech” explains if an individual were to use “fighting words” then they are automatically not covered under their First Amendment. The Supreme Court decided in the case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire that “fighting words” were not constitutional, so they would not be protected under the First Amendment (2). Many people misunderstand that much of their opinions that they speak consists of words that are unclear. More than half of the time the words they use in their statements are considered to be fighting words, for they are rude and ignorant. There is no need for the obscene words that they use to be protected under the First Amendment.
Some people do not go by the First Amendment though. They think there should be limitations to what others say because words can hurt someone, be insulting, and misunderstood. I understand that people should not say words that can be disrespectful to others, but with the first amendment they have the right to speak freely. I understand that there should be a limit to what can be said over the internet and what people say in general but they cannot stop the thoughts of other people. People should be respectful and considerate about what they are saying and respect others and what they too have to say otherwise we would have no freedom of speech.
Each person has a right to their opinion, but it doesn?t mean they need to voice it. Although in some instances rap can be made to seem bad, censoring it or banning it would still be a violation of the First Amendment (Kilbourne). Although this topic is very debatable each person has a right to express themselves in any way. People can have a right to not like rap music on the television, it doesn?t give them a right to say it should not be allowed. For we are a free democratic nation, each person is entitled to the full power of it.