The Evolution of the First Amendment
The first amendment states, "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.(encyclopedia) The inhabitants of the North American colonies did not have a legal right to express opposition to the British government that ruled them.
Nonetheless, throughout the late 1700s, these early Americans did voice their discontent with the crown. For example they strongly denounced the British parliament's enactment of a series of tax levies to pay off a large national debt that England incurred in its Seven Years War with France. In newspaper articles, pamphlets and through boycotts, the colonists raised what would become their battle cry: "No taxation without representation!" And in 1773, the people of the Massachusetts Bay Colony demonstrated their outrage at the tax on tea in a dramatic act of civil disobedience, the Boston Tea Party.(Eldridge,15)
The stage was set for the birth of the First Amendment, which formally recognized the natural and inalienable rights of Americans to think and speak freely. The first Amendments early years were not entirely auspicious.
Although the early Americans enjoyed great freedom compared to citizens of other nations, even the Constitution's framer once in power, could resist the string temptation to circumvent the First Amendment's clear mandate. Before the 1930s, we had no legally protected rights of free speech in anything like the form we now know it. Critics of the government or government officials, called seditious libel, was oftenly made a crime. Every state had a seditious libel law when the Constitution was adopted. And within the decade of the adoption of the First Amendment, the founding fathers in congress initiated and passed the repressive Alien and Sedition act (1798). This act was used by the dominant
Federalists party to prosecute a number of prominent Republican newspaper editors.(Kairys,3) When Thomas Jefferson was elected president in 1801 they also prosecuted their critics. More than 2,000 people were prosecuted, and many served substantial prison te...
... middle of paper ...
...o preserve freedom of expression have taught us anything, it is that the first target of government suppression is never the last. Whenever government gains the power to decide who can speak and what they can say, the first Amendment rights of all of us are in danger of being violated. But when all people are allowed to express their views and ideas, the principles of democracy and liberty are enhanced. American democracy should mean more than the right to picket when you are really upset or pissed at the system and to vote every four years in elections devoid of content or context. Change will require, as it has in the past, recognition that free speech and democracy are political, not narrowly legal, issues. And it will also require an enlargement of our understanding of such rights to include public access to the various mass media.
Bibliography
Eldridge, Larry D. A Distant Heritage: The Growth of Free Speech in Early
America. New York: New York University Press, 1994.
Kairys, David. The Politics of Law In These Times. New York. Patheon Press, 1991.
McWhirter, Darien A. Freedom of Speech, Press, and Assembly, Phoenix AZ: Oryx
Press, 1994.
The World Book Encyclopedia.1995.
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.
According to the Webster-dictionary The First Amendment is an amendment to the Constitution of the United States guaranteeing the right of free expression; includes freedom of assembly and freedom of the press and freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Since the first Amendment was written by our founding fathers and is part of our constitution it should never be violated. Being able to say and express what one thinks without been afraid of going to jail. In the essays “First Amendment Junkie” by Susan Jacoby and “Let’s Put Pornography back in the closet” by Susan Brownmiller both writes about the First Amendment is when one can express them. Jacoby and Brownmiller both write about pornography and the first amendment using pathos and ethos in their writing. However, Jacoby’s essay is more reliable because she uses ethos to provide credible resources, as well as use pathos to appeal to her credibility.
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.
“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” (U.S. Constitution).
On December 15, 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified effective by Congress. These first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America promised the states certain rights and freedoms which could not be infringed by the government. After all, the founding fathers knew from experience that men in their weakness were often tempted by power. They had become all too familiar with this when under the control of King George in England. Therefore, in order to protect the future people of their beautiful country, they promised certain liberties which could not be taken away. Every single one of these freedoms is important for the United States of America. However, the second amendment is especially important to our nation because it allows the people to protect their freedom and defend themselves and the common good against an overreaching government.
Freedom of speech and expression is a right given to all Americans in the First
The Second Amendment to the Constitution(Second Amendment) of the United States of America(USA) is one of the most controversial. The Second Amendment specifically grants that, "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed"
Without the right to speak freely one would not be able to debt, nor would one be able to receive full coverage on world issues. There would be no interesting newspapers, no free religion and no free thoughts. This amendment seems so simple but, the boundaries of which issues and incidents are covered are so complex and varied. What is legal and illegal?
“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.” (First Amendment Center, 2008)
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” This quote from Benjamin Franklin illustrates how an emphasis on safety can drastically reduce the freedoms enjoyed by citizens of the United States, especially the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which states that “...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” However, with active shooter situations such as Columbine; the Tucson, Arizona shootings, which nearly killed former Representative Gabrielle Giffords; and recent situations at Newtown, Connecticut; Los Angeles International Airport; and Westfield Garden State Plaza mall in New Jersey, the federal government has questioned this right guaranteed to us as U.S. Citizens. In Congress, it is a back-and-forth battle between the Republicans, who favor less gun control legislation and a literal translation of the Second Amendment, and the Democrats who would like to see more gun control legislation to protect the safety of citizens. However, more gun control legislation would punish law-abiding citizens, be a direct violation of the Second Amendment, and expand the power of the federal government into areas where the Founding Fathers never wanted it.
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.
As violence and murder rates escalate in America so does the issue of gun control. The consequence of this tragedy births volatile political discourse about gun control and the Second Amendment. The crux of the question is what the founding fathers meant when they wrote, “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Since the writing of the Second Amendment the make and model of firearms has changed dramatically and so has the philosophies of the people. A rifle is no longer defined as a single shot, muzzle-loading musket used to primarily protect families or solely for food. Should the weapons we use today be protected by an amendment written nearly 222 years ago? Should the second amendment be rewritten? Does the Second Amendment apply to individual citizens? These questions spark extensive debates in Washington D.C. regarding what the founding fathers intended the amendment to be. The answer to this question lies in the fact that despite hundreds of gun control articles having been written , still the gun control issue remains unresolved. History tells us gun control debates will be in a stalemate until our judicial system defines or rewrites the Second Amend. This paper will examine the history of the Second Amendment, and attempt to define the framers intent, gun control legislation and look at factors that affect Americans on this specific issue...
Based on the First Amendment, the government may not exercise any activities that interference freedom of speech of an individual. For Americans, freedom of speech is clearly become the most basic freedom. Everyone has always thinks freedom of speech is a basic right that everyone automatically has when they were born; on the other hand, freedom of speech is experiencing serious growing pains.
Freedom of speech cannot be considered an absolute freedom, and even society and the legal system recognize the boundaries or general situations where the speech should not be protected. Along with rights comes civil responsib...