Essay PreviewMore ↓
The First Amendment has led Americans to believe in a hallowed sense of freedom that does not exist; freedom of speech. Freedom of speech in this country has never been absolute. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, solicit bribes, make terrorist threats, slander another, intentionally inflict emotional distress or be obscene in public (Dickerson).
What Americans do have a right to is their opinion and the means by which to express it, no matter if the opinion is favorable or not. There are some advocates who champion for restrictions on unfavorable speech, like violent or racist remarks. And though the intentions behind such beliefs are made in good faith, it is unrealistic to believe the mission of filtering out racist speech could be completed without catching in the same net all kinds of other speech that is considered "OK" (Lawrence III 514). I firmly believe that a government that tells its citizens what is appropriate to say will soon be dictating what they may think also, and by that, it is unlawful for the government to regulate racist or violent speech. By doing so the government would intrude on students' creativity and learning process, would set illusive restraints on racist behavior, and undermine the Constitution at whole.
To begin, government censorship and the student learning process are an incompatible combination. In any efforts the government might make to protect students from bad ideas, the students are deprived of the right to make up their own minds and form opinions. They are also deprived of creative freedom if their work is reflected by the fear of being censored or punished for their writing. How will students learn to identify and cope with bad ideas or negative arguments if they are not exposed to them or allowed to expose their opinion on them? (Hentoff 517).
A case in Blaine, Wash., validates such a point. 16-year-old James Lavine was expelled because he wrote a poem. Though Lavine was never involved in much trouble in school, never showed a short-fused temper, never showed desire to inflict harm on animals or start fires, and never showed interest in weapons or bombs, Lavine was expelled because his poem described a murder (Tisdale).
How to Cite this Page
"Freedom of Speech: My Version and Theirs." 123HelpMe.com. 17 Jul 2018
Need Writing Help?
Get feedback on grammar, clarity, concision and logic instantly.Check your paper »
- ... - If the student denies the alleged misconduct that he or she is accused of, he or she should be given an explanation, either in writing or orally, about the facts that have led to the proposed suspension. - The principal should also provide the student with a good opportunity to present his or her version of the case. 3. Outline the requirements and definitions of student substantive and procedural due process. - Students should be offered the opportunity for a hearing before the exclusion from school following disciplinary reasons.... [tags: freedom of speech, demonstrations]
1885 words (5.4 pages)
- The term political correctness (PC) has infringed on our freedom of speech by assuming that the populace is too ignorant to realize what appropriate speech is. This term is now as common in our society as the term, ‘freedom of speech’. It is incomprehensible how these two words have had such an effect on the manner in which our society communicates. The trend casts a negative view on our society by letting political views determine what is appropriate in our social sector. Political correctness, as applied in today’s society, seeks to control freedom of speech and poses a true danger to a free society.... [tags: Freedom of Speech]
1460 words (4.2 pages)
- Freedom of speech has been a topic of discussion for many years. Since democracy was established in many countries to provide safety and rights, freedom of speech has been one of the most important rights in any constitution. Freedom of speech constitutes a human right that all people should have and one that must be respected. As individuals, we are entitled to express our opinions, write, publish or communicate, and such expressions must be, if not shared, respected. Different countries have certain level of tolerance at the moment of executing this right.... [tags: Freedom of Speech]
807 words (2.3 pages)
- The First Amendment of the United States gives citizens the five main rights to freedom. Freedom of speech is one of the rights. If people did not have the freedom of speech there would be no way of expressing one’s self and no way to show individuality between beliefs. This Amendment becomes one of the issues in the Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District Supreme Court case that happened in December of 1969. In the case of Tinker v. Des Moines there were five students that got suspended for wearing armbands to protest the Government’s policy in Vietnam.... [tags: beliefs, rights, freedom, speech]
687 words (2 pages)
- The articles "Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City" and "Freedom of Religion: Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association" both engage in conflicts pertaining to the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights. "Freedom of Speech: Missouri Knights of the Ku Klux Klan v. Kansas City" is an article about the KKK's attempt to spread their beliefs through a public access cable television channel. Dennis Mahon and Allan Moran, both of the KKK, asked to be broadcasted on air in 1987, and the whole situation led to a major problem.... [tags: Freedom of Speech]
1532 words (4.4 pages)
- Living in the United States we enjoy many wonderful freedoms and liberties. Even though most of these freedoms seem innate to our lives, most have been earned though sacrifice and hard work. Out of all of our rights, freedom of speech is perhaps our most cherished, and one of the most controversial. Hate speech is one of the prices we all endure to ensure our speech stays free. But with hate speeches becoming increasingly common, many wonder if it is too great of a price to pay, or one that we should have to pay at all.... [tags: Freedom of Speech Essays]
2303 words (6.6 pages)
- In the essays, “In Defense of Prejudice: Why Incendiary Speech Must Be Protected” by Jonathan Rauch and “The Debate over Placing Limits on Racist Speech Must Not Ignore the Damage It Does to Its Victims” by Charles R. Lawrence III, the writers express their beliefs on the topic of freedom of speech and prejudice speech; particularly racist. As far as any benefits of prejudice speech go, the two writers thoroughly disagree. Lawrence believes that there are no benefits of prejudice speech and it should not be included in what America’s “freedom of speech” entails, because of its effect on minorities as he writes, “Whenever we decide that racist speech must be tolerated because of the importanc... [tags: prejudice speech,racist speech,jonathan rauch]
1396 words (4 pages)
- I.Introduction This paper addresses whether we should censor or block access to websites with controversial material. It looks at the issue from several sides: The relevant US laws that are in place, how censorship is used at the university and corporate levels, how other countries are attempting censorship, and finally what I feel about the topic. Given all that I have read in preparing this paper, I have come to the conclusion that without a set of globally-accepted rules, we should not be censoring the Internet except where these rules are being broken.... [tags: Freedom of Speech]
3924 words (11.2 pages)
- The right to freedom of expression can be described as a war. It is a war that has lasted for centuries and may last for centuries more. It is a war between freedom of expression and social intolerance. In this war there are many battles. The battle on which this brief essay centers itself is the battle between freedom of speech and laws limiting that freedom; more specifically the ability to spread hate propaganda and the "hate laws". Included in the essay is a brief outline of one skirmish that has taken place (Keegstra).... [tags: Freedom of Speech]
1923 words (5.5 pages)
- There seems to be an internal desire for freedom within the soul of every man. Men realize that freedom is something basic, and to rob a man of his freedom is to take from him the essential basis of his manhood. The words of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., spoken forty-three years ago, capture the spirit of the American dream. Since its conception, the United States of America has been the universal symbol for freedom and hope. The five most fundamental freedoms cherished by every citizen are granted in the First Amendment to the Constitution.... [tags: Freedom of Speech]
2761 words (7.9 pages)
Secondly, the government's specific censorship of a racist's remarks will not always solve the problem at hand. For example, in 1995 the California Supreme Court forbade John Lawrence from using racial slurs ever again after being found guilty of workplace harassment (Dickerson). Eight of Lawrence's Latino co-workers at Avis Car Rental were awarded a total of $150,000 in damages after they were exposed to verbal harassment from Lawrence. They were routinely battered with names like "wetback," "crook" and "spic," along with being demeaned for their poor English skills. Yes, racial epithets and harassment often cause deep emotional scarring for victims (Lawrence III 515), but the court's actions after the fact leaves many
loopholes that do not solve the problem at hand.
Judge Bea, who oversaw the Lawrence case, created a list of proscribed words that John Lawrence was forbidden to utter -- (Lawrence is still employed by Avis) (Dickerson). This is absurd! What if Bea forgot a word? "Lawrence could easily coin nonsense words to convey his contempt for Hispanics, speak with a Speedy Gonzalez accent, or get a buddy to say the dirty words for him" (Dickerson). Yes, while the order to restrict Lawrence's vocabulary simply repressed the defendant from continuing unlawful activity (I am referring to harassment), can we allow the courts to penalize speech before we know what was said to whom? I don't believe so and in isolating specific racist thoughts and words, we only give the haters the opportunity to seek other routes in expressing their anger. We will never be in the clear of this one.
Lastly, by censoring any type of speech, other than unlawful speech (slander and libel, for example), the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are undermined. The First Amendment is written on a principle based on free thought. "Not free only for those who agree with us, but freedom for the thought we hate" (Hentoff 519). If the Constitution, and especially the Bill of Rights are to mean anything, then sometimes we just have to suppress the urge to implement solutions that may be even worse than the problems they were meant to address. Words like "Die, Die, Die Pig" are strong but the Constitution protects strong speech (Ehrenreich 522). It would be impossible to stop the haters from hating, but even if there was a way to stop the racists of the world, undermining the Constitution shouldn't be one of them.
In conclusion, "freedom of speech is the lifeblood of our democratic system" (Lawrence III 514). No matter how hard we struggle, it is still so difficult to solve the racial puzzles in this country. Beyond our attempts to enforce affirmative action, bussing and minority scholarships, the honor of free speech is still in conflict with the elimination of racism (Lawrence III 513). Until Judge Bea, from the John Lawrence/Avis harassment case, incited the ruling banning Lawrence from using racial slurs again, a racist's worst nightmare was being penalized for his past behaviors, but now he can be legally muzzled from spewing his invective again. (Dickerson). I feel this decision is in violation with the First Amendment, and we should not be proud of ourselves. Sometimes there isn't a litigated, legislated, law-based answer to our problems (Dickerson). I do believe in a persons right to express his or her opinions. Although, this is not the norm to allow anyone to voice their opinions whenever and on whatever topic they want. Opinions that differ from the norm are sometimes subjected to constitutionality and scorn or are squelched all together. I stand by the military saying, I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for you to have the right to say it.
Ehrenreich, Barbara. "Ice-T: The Issue is Creative Freedom." Elements of Argument. Ed.
Hentoff, Nat. "Free Speech on the Campus." Elements of Argument. Ed.
"How Not to Stifle a Racist." Ed. Debra Dickerson. Salon.com.
16 Aug. 1999
Lawrence III, Charles R. "On Racist Speech." Elements of Argument. Ed.
"Second Thoughts." Ed. Sallie Tisdale. Salon.com. 5 Nov. 1998