ipl-logo

Why The Right To Free Speech Should Have Limitations Essay

469 Words2 Pages

America is a beacon of freedom and justice. It is a place where anyone is free to live any way he or she wants to live. America is a place where all people can live together in peace regardless of their ethnicity, religion, or sexuality. All across the world, people look at America and dream of being a part of such an amazing world. The foundation of freedom is the recognition of every citizen’s right to express his or her own beliefs and opinions without limitation. Therefore, even if someone has an opinion that is considered inappropriate or unpopular they still have the right to express that opinion. Without the right to free speech, no one would be able to protect the rest of his or her rights. Limiting an individual's right to free speech because their opinions are deemed unpopular by any government, university, or group is a threat to the very foundation of American society. …show more content…

For instance, someone could refer to a black person as a racial slur with the intention of being hateful, and defend his or her hatefulness by claiming to only be exercising his or her right to free speech. Obviously, black people do not like the idea of being referred to by hateful slurs. However, they cannot take matters into their own hands and assault whomever is calling them names, so they believe that it is the government’s job to make laws and regulations to prevent people from abusing their right to free speech. Travis and Scott (2017), say that “Because the use of slurs can cause discomfort or even pain for the listener, some advocate restrictions on uttering or even printing especially damaging slurs” (Travis & Scott, 2017, p. 293) meaning some would prefer if laws were in place to prevent minority groups from hearing slurs . In conclusion, supporters of regulated speech would argue that hate speech should be

Show More
Related
1091 Words | 5 Pages

Whether laws intend to limit the offensive power of a minority or protect a minority from attacks, either way rights are lost. In the words of Roger Baldwin, founder of the civil liberties union, “In order to defend the people you like, you have to defend the people you hate.” Roger Baldwin’s statement indicates that if we limit the free speech of one group we ultimately limit our own freedoms. The first Amendment clearly states the limiting of any groups right is unconstitutional, “make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.” The basis behind not allowing the government to define free speech allows Americans to create their own social order and among themselves determine what is acceptable.

Read More
967 Words | 4 Pages

After mentioning why racist speech is wrong, Lawrence comments “I also have a deeply felt apprehension about the resurgence of racial violence and the corresponding rise in the incidence of verbal and symbolic assault and harassment to which blacks and other traditionally subjected and excluded groups are subjected”(72). Putting emphasis on how racist actions hurt others is important for the reader to comprehend. Furthermore, the idea of free speech “reinforces our society’s commitment to tolerance as a value”(71). Gives choices to each individual to decide who and what they stand for, no more pandering and watching what others do. As a result, free speech brings community together as a whole.

Read More
449 Words | 2 Pages

However, Charles also addresses the difficulty of speech regulation. Although people often recognize the pain that minority groups suffer due to racist speeches, it will be impossible to suppress racist speeches without suppressing other kinds of speeches that would’ve benefited society. There’s a risk that suppressing racist speeches might be used to dominate free speeches instead. Therefore, it is imperative that we fully understand the real harm caused by racial speech and know that this harm is far from

Read More
912 Words | 4 Pages

Currently, the United State’s criterion on Speech includes, “obscenity, fraud, child pornography, harassment, incitement to illegal conduct and imminent lawless action, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising, copyright or patent rights” (Gaudefroy 3). However, speech involving discriminatory words or racial intentions are protected by the law. To avoid instances that degrade the minority group, stricter rules need to be enforced on the delicate topic. Restrictions on hate speech should include usage of “misogynistic, homophobic, racist, and conspiracy-laden language” (Gaudefroy 3). Efforts to restrict these types of beliefs would create a more safe and equal society for all individuals.

Read More
1626 Words | 7 Pages

Throughout the ages, the pursuit of freedom has established our social, political, and legal environments, serving as the main force behind society’s development. In a democracy, the right to free speech, the press, and religion serve as foundations for open debate and as defenses against despotism. Not only have these liberties created the growth of civil rights, but they are also a necessity that enables people to voice their opinions and critically evaluate the acts of the government. The fundamental right to freedom of speech is recognized as one of the primary liberties for the operation of a free and open society. The value of free speech cannot be overstated since it guarantees that all opinions, no matter how well-liked or disliked,

Read More
507 Words | 3 Pages

The First Amendment guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. There are many ideas expressed in times where it would be inappropriate or unnecessary to use one’s freedom of speech. These circumstances would be where something is inappropriate or misidentified as hate speech. There are many situations where someone may want to say something, yet there are times where some things should not be said.

Read More
707 Words | 3 Pages

Hate speech includes, but is not limited to, gesture, conduct, writing, or verbal communication that might encourage discriminatory behavior to a protected individual or group of individuals. Many universities are committed to creating an atmosphere of equal opportunity that harbors talent, creativity and ingenuity. Speech codes are not only justifiable, but are also essential to campuses because they do not allow the use of hate speech. One who is for the use of speech codes on campuses may argue alongside Lawrence in saying that it is unacceptable to use hate speech in any scenario or environment because it suppresses the voices of minorities. Lawrence presents the idea that “the subordinate victims of fighting words are silenced by their relatively powerless position in society.”

Read More
64 Words | 1 Pages

Free speech is the right to speak without censorship. Free speech should III. HIstory of Free speech and how it has brought about change? IV.

Read More
487 Words | 2 Pages

Hate Speech Should be Regulated People now on these days do not care about the word hate speech because it’s not even mentioned that much like back on the old days where people would protest against the first amendment. Moreover hate speech can lead to crimes and it’s largely protected in the courts. Hate speech is when a person or a group of people is attacked based on factors such as their gender, race, sexual orientation, religion, or disability. It can also include verbal and written communication.

Read More
936 Words | 4 Pages

Freedom of speech allows individuals to publicly decipher whatever words they wish to speak. It is a reasonable concept of a coherent argument with combative or comparative in speech for which it can be mistaken for hate speech. The forms of the inabilities between hate and free speech to imagine a new world. The difference between two speeches as a powerful movement towards changing the attitudes about limiting speech for individuals. The characterizing of this controversy is that hate speech regulations are not beyond our grasp, but theatrical and legal if society does not take a stand and bring on to change.

Read More
770 Words | 4 Pages

Charles Lawrence in his racist speech tries to convince that racist speech needs to be regulated. He argues that hate speech is intolerable in the United States because it represents discrimination which Everyone defines hate speech differently. I define hate speech as anything that incites aggression regarding one person or a group of people. Now a day’s people uses free speech as a defense for saying anything but discriminating someone is not free speech.

Read More
991 Words | 4 Pages

Freedom of speech is one of the foundations to our liberty and pride. We, as Americans, are free to express what be believe in, no matter if you’re more liberal or more conservative. If we take away a form of free speech, that’d take away part of our freedom and liberty. Look at how America reacted when talk of enforcing more gun laws came up. Whether there was any stock behind it or not, everybody jumped to polar opposites on this issue and fiercely starting defending their own beliefs.

Read More
1500 Words | 6 Pages

Conversely, the United States does not and should not limit their citizens freedom of speech, unless it is a threat that will harm the public. In the United States, freedom of speech is guaranteed, meaning people can assemble for peaceful protests without any fear at danger of imprisonment. Freedom of speech in our country has also led to the inventions of many great ideas. People have the opportunity to listen to new opinions other than their own and become more productive and informed. It also allows people know which opinions are the majority.

Read More
285 Words | 2 Pages

Although hate speech is bigoted, hate-mongering, and can potentially lead to hate crimes, it should still be considered free speech. If citizens of the United States are not allowed to be verbal about their beliefs, whether or not they are offensive and hateful, then there is no use in allowing free speech. Placing limitations on free speech contradicts the First Amendment, therefore making it inaccurate and useless.

Read More
1152 Words | 5 Pages

The ability to speak freely is written in the bill of rights and has been preserved for decades, but when free speech turns into hate speech it brings up the widely deliberated issue about banning hate speech. There are many different perspectives on the issue of hate speech. Author of Hate Speech is Free Speech, Gov. Dean and Law professor, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, applies a strong historical perspective on the situation arguing that people are “constitutionally illiter[ate]” when they make the claim that hate speech is not part of the First Amendment. Believing that it is impossible to ban hate speech because everyone will always disagree with any idea, Reynolds focuses on the problems with banning hate speech and what might happen if hate

Read More

More about Why The Right To Free Speech Should Have Limitations Essay

Related Topics

Open Document