That law made it illegal for anyone to advocate action against the government. This case was instrumental in how freedom of speech is looked at today. The Supreme Court decided that the, "...constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not permit a State to ... ... middle of paper ... ...he end of the United State’s involvement in Vietnam. The government should have no interference in the absolute freedom of expression rights the American people have. These many things affected our right to freedom of speech in their own way, but always the American people have come out stronger because of it.
Should there be restrictions to freedom of speech synonyms, and is there a scarcity of freedom that is given to individuals? Freedom to the people has been Americas greatest accomplishment, yet the checks and balances placed between the lines of freedom are not defined. Obscenity speeches are defined as outside the boundaries of the First Amendment protection. Libel and Slander of public figures must be proven by malice; the reckless disregard for the truth. Commercial speeches can be banned by the government as illegal if the information if deceptive to the readers.
Open your eyes, pay attention to the messages around you, and make a conscious effort to analyze what you are accepting into your head. Censorship of media messages is an explicit violation of our constitutionally protected right to expression, and as such, should not be looked to as a solution for modern-day violence in society. Infringing upon our freedoms of speech and expression is not a substitute for being a responsible viewer. Paternalistic Moralism by the government limits our thinking. A universal code of acceptability confines our thoughts to that of one narrow faction.
Also, the definition states suppression of speech considered inconvenient to the government. The Constitution guarantees us the right to Freedom of Speech specifically to keep government from suppressing our speech. Many argue that there are words, phrases, pictures and ideas that are so offensive that we must have government pass laws to keep these from being spoken or discussed. They would further argue that the enormity of the degree of offense warrants such censorship. There are certain types of speech that fall under that definition, howe... ... middle of paper ... ...an trust what the paper’s say because the state runs the media.
However, the courts in Oman take this law to mean that insulting a public official is illegal. Article 31 addresses press, printing, and publishing. It states that the freedom of press, printing, and publishing is protected by the Law. Despite this freedom, magazines and newspapers are expected to be consistent with government views and media presence in the country is limited and monitored by the government. The citizens are given internet access, but the Telecommunications Regulatory Authority monitors activity and any sites deemed pornographic, culturally or politically sensitive are to be blocked immediately.
Censoring material is the responsibility of the individual, not the institution itself, and certainly not the job of a separate institution. Also, the definition of what is censor-worthy is by no means clear. Exercising the freedom of speech has two sides: the speaker and the listener. Censorship is unfair to both sides. When it takes away the speaker’s Constitutional freedom of expression, it simultaneously revokes the listener’s right to develop an informed opinion based on unobstructed truth.
By censoring material, the American government unmistakably infringes the American Constitution as it restricts civil rights by contradicting freedom of speech which is assured to American citizens. As American citizens, we have the unalienable right to express ourselves as specified in the First Amendment of the revered document: "Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise... of speech, or of the press." Hence, any act that foils the media or beings from attainment of information infringes upon their constitutional rights. However, National Security Letters, those which avert the receiver of the letter from unveiling that the letter was even received, are still manufactured by the government ... ... middle of paper ... ... indecent reports. In comparison, Americans have not received any word of their government's own actions of terrorism in foreign nations.
Freedom of speech means that one must speak his mind to without fear of being punished, detained or discriminated against it. Freedom of speech also means that you may distribute your personal views, for example by organizing a demonstration against a new law, or publish his opinion in a newspaper, on the radio, television or the Internet. Freedom of speech is one of the human rights that the United Nations has included in 'The Universal Declaration of Human Rights'. All 193 member states of the UN have agreed so to guarantee the freedom of speech in their country. Nevertheless, it is not respected everywhere, including in countries where there is war or that have a dictator as head.
Consequently, the government is not allowed to interfere or punish the people for their opinions on anything, as long as it is an opinion or a fact. The only exception to this are the fighting words, slander, and libel clauses that are part of the freedom of speech to ensure that people do not take advantage of our right and use it for evil (Cornell University). Before this issue was addressed in the first amendment the government would punish the people if they said something negative about the government or the government’s public officials, which was cruel and unjust. “The importance of the Freedom of Assembly to the Founding Fathers stretched back into pre-colonial American history. The English monarchy often restricted the right of English citizens to assemble in public.
There are many risks in expressing unorthodox views [ The Press Law of1966 (UU No.11/1966) provides that "no censorship or bridling shall be applied to the National Press" (Article 4) and calls on the press to "fight for truth and justice based on the freedom of the Press" (Article). A caveat to this freedom exists in Article 11, however, which contains the proviso that "publications conflicting with Pancasila, such as those inspired by Communism/Marxism-Leninism are forbidden." (The press under siege, 1994:6). (The press under siege, 1994:4) Article 28 of Indonesia's 1945 Constitution (Indonesia's independence proclamation year) provides that "freedom of speech and of the Press and similar freedoms shall be provided by the law". In practice, however, severe restrictions exist on freedom of speech.