The First Amendment is currently being violated by college speech codes. College speech codes are policies that regulate speech and expression. The First Amendment allows all peaceful free speech, while colleges are limiting free speech with speech codes. According to the Foundation For Individual Right In Education, out of 400 universities that were surveyed, 62 percent have codes that violate the First Amendment (Lukianoff 1). This organization has been successful with getting some of these speech codes defeated or withdrawn in court, but the codes still remain an issue. In 1984, speech is restrained due to Newspeak, which is a system that simplifies and decreases the amount of words. Our world is becoming like 1984 because speech censorship …show more content…
The Party, in 1984, creates Newspeak to reduce a person’s independent thought and make them simple minded. Newspeak made people speak without using their “higher brain centers” (Orwell 309). Therefore, all conversation is meant to be non-substantial and dull. In the real world, some people such as Greg Lukianoff having been arguing that speech censorship has negative effects. He is the CEO of Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which is an organization that defends civil liberties on college campuses. His argument is that not exposing students to “harsh ideas” has given them a “hard time disagreeing productively” (Madhani 1). In essence, decreasing the vocabulary that somebody can use is overall hurtful to their conversation skills. Additionally, a professor or teacher could be fired for expressing their opinion on a certain topic. Steven Salaita was fired for posting anti-Israel comments on social media (Madhani 1). A person is entitled to their own opinion and that right is protected under the First Amendment. In 1984, people are immediately “vaporized” for having non-conventional thoughts and ideas. In both scenarios, people are punished for having their own thoughts. Moreover, the students of this generation aren’t learning the correct values of an American society. Lukianoff continues to explain how patronizing attitudes toward the students is giving them a false sense of pluralism and free speech (Madhani 1). If this trend remains, then the next generation of adults will have a faulty perception of how America works. Overall, students’ actions and thoughts are being suppressed, which parallels the oppression in
Throughout America, people place a high value in their freedom of speech. This right is protected by the first Amendment and practiced in communities throughout the country. However, a movement has recently gained momentum on college campuses calling for protection from words and ideas that may cause emotional discomfort. This movement is driven mainly by students who demand that speech be strictly monitored and punishments inflicted on individuals who cause even accidental offense. Greg Lukianoff and Johnathan Haidt discuss how this new trend affects the students mentally and socially in their article The Coddling of the American Mind published in The Atlantic Monthly. Lukianoff and Haidt mostly use logical reasoning and references to
In America the Amendment 1 of the U.S. Constitution gives the American people the right to peaceably assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Most notably Amendment 1 is known for and most often cited as giving the Freedom of Speech. Even before this amendment was ratified people in the U.S. were protesting, as in the Boston Tea Party. Protesting has been a way to effect change in America. A question to ask is this: is there a right way or wrong way to protest.
From the opening sentence of the essay, “We are free to be you, me, stupid, and dead”, Roger Rosenblatt hones in on a very potent and controversial topic. He notes the fundamental truth that although humans will regularly shield themselves with the omnipresent First Amendment, seldom do we enjoy having the privilege we so readily abuse be used against us. 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”.
1. In the First Amendment, the clause that states “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion” is based on the Establishment Clauses that is incorporated in the amendment. This clauses prohibits the government to establish a state religion and then enforce it on its citizens to believe it. Without this clause, the government can force participation in this chosen religion, and then punish anyone who does not obey to the faith chosen. This clause was in issue in a court case mentioned in Gaustad’s reading “Proclaim Liberty Throughout All the Land”. March v. Chambers was a court case that involved the establishment clause. Chambers was a member of the Nebraska state legislature who began each session with prayer by a chaplain who was being paid the state. The case stated that this violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. However, the court stated that the establishment clause was not breached by the prayer, but was violated because of the fact that the chaplain was being paid from public funds.
Benjamin Franklin once said, “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.” Indeed, free speech is a large block upon which this nation was first constructed, and remains a hard staple of America today; and in few places is that freedom more often utilized than on a college campus. However, there are limitations to our constitutional liberties on campus and they, most frequently, manifest themselves in the form of free speech zones, hate speech and poor university policy. Most school codes are designed to protect students, protect educators and to promote a stable, non-disruptive and non-threatening learning environment. However, students’ verbal freedom becomes limited via “free speech zones.” Free Speech Zones are areas allocated for the purpose of free speech on campus. These zones bypass our constitutional right to freedom of speech by dictating where and when something can be said, but not what can be said.
On December 15th, 1971, the first X amendments to the Constitution went into affect. The first X amendments to the constitution were known as the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment was written by James Madison because the American people were demanding a guarantee of their freedom. The First Amendment was put into place to protect American’s freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly and freedom of petition. The First Amendment was written as follows;
This occurs even when the regulations arent enforced souly because they fear being punished for what they may say. As shown in Silverglate and Lukianoffs essay, some campuses go to great extents when giving students permission to give free speeches. They claim that “as long as the policy exists, the threat of enfocement remains real and will inevitably influence some peoples speech” (636). This is a valid argument because they then proceed by saying that The First Amendment calls it a clinging effect. Another effect of these regulations would be that colleges are teaching their students that their opinions and beliefs should not be shared when they are even slightly controversial. Wasserman argues that word choice is an “essential component of free-speech protection”(640) because they allow one to express him or herself
The United States of America seems to be protected by a very important historical document called the Constitution. Despite the fact that it was written and signed many years ago, the American people and their leaders still have faith in the Constitution. One of the major statements of the Constitution is the First Amendment, freedom of speech. Although it is difficult to decide what is offensive and what is not, it is clear to see that songs of rape, violence, bigotry, and songs containing four letter words are completely unnecessary for susceptible minds to acknowledge. It is reasonable to say that more people listen to music everyday and for that reason, music tends to be more influential. The American people should consider the idea of censorship of music lyrics that influence violence. We as Americans, have the voice to make artists think about the harm that their lyrics can cause their listeners and possibly change their damaging style. I think it would benefit the American people to research the effects of music lyrics on people, debate the findings of the research, and discuss the consequences and possible solutions for the problem. Those who see no problem with the explicit and vulgar lyrics of today's music use The United States Constitution to back up their rights. This very Constitution was adopted by a convention of the States on September 17, 1787 (12) and has been a ruling thumb in the actions of the United States Government. The current date is April 21, 1999—that's 212 years later! This is where the very popular freedom of speech amendment comes into play. This Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exe...
The fundamental purpose of the first amendment was to guarantee the maintenance of an effective system of free speech and expression. This calls for an examination of the various elements which are necessary to support such a system in a modem democratic society. Some of these elements found early articulation in the classic theory of free expression, as it developed over the course of centuries; others are the outgrowth of contemporary conditions. More specifically, it is necessary to analyze what it is that the first amendment attempts to maintain: the function of freedom of expression in a democratic society; what the practical difficulties are in maintaining such a system: the dynamic forces at work in any governmental attempt to restrict or regulate expression; and the role of law and legal institutions in developing and supporting freedom of expression. These three elements are the basic components of any comprehensive theory of the first amendment viewed as a guarantee of a system of free expression.
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.
The First Amendment is the first section of the Bill of Rights and is often considered the most important part of the U.S Constitution because it guarantees the citizens of United States the essential personal freedoms of religion, speech, press, peaceful assembly and the freedom to petition the Government. Thanks to the rights granted by the First Amendment, Americans are able to live in a country where they can freely express themselves, speak their mind, pray without interference, protest in peace and where their opinions are taken into consideration, which is something not many other nationalities have the fortune of saying. The Founding Fathers were the framers of the Constitution of the U.S., and the responsible for the elaboration of the First Amendment. The majority of the Founding Fathers were enlightenment thinkers who were in love with liberty, and thought that basic political rights were inevitable for man’s nature. After having experienced the tyranny from their mother countries, the Founding Fathers carefully constructed the Constitution of the United States in a way where tyranny was avoided and a government for the people, by the people and of the people was developed, which is clearly reflected in the Constitution. At the time of inception of the United States, the Founding Fathers created the First Amendment in order to ensure that the government would not interfere with Americans’ basic civil rights. The rights outlined on the First Amendment were considered so important by these leaders that many states refused to ratify the Constitution of the United Sates until there was a conjecture of amendments that would protect individual rights in the future.
Earlier this month in April, student protestors rioted at Berkley University because they did not want certain Conservative guest speakers to be able to give speeches at the university due to some of the speakers comments being inappropriate. According to the nonprofit organization committed to defending civil liberties named The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), "One worrisome trend undermining open discourse in the academy is the increased push by some students and faculty to 'disinvite' speakers with whom they disagree from campus appearances" (The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education). While the protesters were practicing their first amendment right to petition, the students were infringing upon the Conservative speakers freedom of speech which is unconstitutional. Just because the protesters may have disagreed with the speakers comments, does not mean that theys hould have prevented them from being able to express them. This is similar to the novel 1984 because the protestors controlled and censored what was able to be said at Berkeley University, just like how in the novel the Thought Police controlled what citizens said just because The Party disagreed with certain perspectives and didn’t want certain information to be
In the United States, free speech is protected by the First Amendment in which it states, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion … or abridging the freedom of speech.” Now, nearly 250 years into the future, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were afraid of is starting to happen. Today, our freedom of speech is being threatened through different forces, such as the tyranny of the majority, the protection of the minority, and the stability of the society. Now, colleges and universities in the United States today are also trying to institute a code upon its students that would bar them from exercising their right to speak freely in the name of protecting minorities from getting bullied. This brings us into
Keeping the public uneducated essential to their credulousness. Orwell explains, “The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of Ingsoc, but to make all other modes of thought impossible . . . literally unthinkable,” (246). If the public is unable to think of rebellion, then rebellion is unfeasible. The Party has invaded every citizen 's right to choose, including their right to think. As the ability to think decreases, so does the ability to create. Without the invention of new ideas, society will never be able to advance; they will forever be stuck in the oppression
Since the foundation of the United States after a harsh split from Britain, almost 200 years later, an issue that could claim the founding grounds for the country is now being challenged by educators, high-ranking officials, and other countries. Though it is being challenged, many libertarians, democrats, and free-speech thinkers hold the claim that censorship violates our so-called unalienable rights, as it has been proven throughout many court cases. Censorship in the United States is detrimental because it has drastically and negatively altered many significant events. Censorship allows governments more control of society than they already have, slowly progressing governments utilizing censorship to a dictatorship. Often times, this censorship can lead to immense rebellions.