...Freedom of Speech, Hate Speech, & Talk Radio Brice Hinchman Freedom of Speech, Hate Speech, & Talk Radio What is Freedom of speech? Well, the definition for freedom of speech is the ability to speak freely without being subject to censorship or without fear of retaliation from a governing body. There are at least two documents, the US Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that acknowledge that free speech is an unalienable right and protect it for all. There is another form of speech that may or may not be protected, depending on the circumstances, under the same documents and that is hate speech. Some of the limitations that are put in place by Government, employers, and educational facilities are a violation of what freedom of speech is really about, being able to freely speak your mind, but are necessary to protect the rights and liberties of other individuals. The freedom of speech is a very powerful right that is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Our Founding Fathers set the stage when they wrote the Declaration of Independence by stating that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” (Choices, 81). One of these liberties and unalienable rights was the Freedom of speech. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which was ratified...
Words: 2457 - Pages: 10
...many other countries have laws against hate speech and that such laws have sometime been passed in the United States, although not nationally. I think this is because, as mentioned by Waldron, many countries consider hate laws in Europe and in other countries in which manifestations of hate are prohibited rather than tolerated in the name of free speech. I also think this because other countries in which have these hate laws, their constitutions acknowledge that basic rights, including freedom of expression, are legitimately subject to restriction. I think it isn’t consistent because many states vary in the extent to which they allow their national legislation be guided by international human-rights laws. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education reviews the narrow definitions of exceptions for the free-speech clause of the U.S Constitution, noting that universities frequently go beyond these exceptions in their speech codes. Those narrow exceptions include: speech that incites reasonable people to immediate violence, so-called “fighting words”, harassment, true threats and intimidation, obscenity, and defamation. I think that universities go beyond these exceptions in their speech codes because of the recent events that have happened. For example, I think the Virginia Tech massacre made a lot of universities scared that something like that could happen at their university, so they started to go beyond exceptions of the free-speech clause to make sure that nothing like...
Words: 852 - Pages: 4
...Freedom of speech should include the right to use hate speech because people have their own opinions and should be allowed to express their love and hatred for specific things. Hate speech is defined as “speech that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin , ethnicity, colour, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation or disability.” Unfortunately human beings will always feel the need to judge others even if they themselves dont want to be a judgemental person, they will subconciously judge other people no matter what. Certain people take it to the extent where it is not accepted by society, this is what we call hate speech. Society has however become more fragile and it seems everyday speech is considered hate speech to a certain extent....
Words: 607 - Pages: 3
...Hate speech is nothing new to American universities. It is defined as language that slanders a particular group based on race, color, gender, nationality, as well as other characteristics. Though colleges try to combat hate speech with speech codes, these codes are never upheld in court, and as a result the victims are left to suffer. Sadly, most victims are minorities who have been historically oppressed, such as African Americans and women. In order to help the minorities targeted by hate speech on college campuses, the sufferers must be empowered to speak out through the creation of a national organization and eventually the Supreme Court must rule that the freedom of speech does not include hate speech. An increase of hate speech on college...
Words: 1463 - Pages: 6
...‘goodbye’ to speaking one’s mind. There is a division forming in the United States of America. This division is between those who believe hate speech should be regulated and cannot differentiate between a word and an action; As opposed to those who simply and wholeheartedly believe that a word is just a word and not an action. They appreciate the right to free speech and do not wish to compromise it. In the article “Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, he clearly demonstrates the possibility of ignorance and peace rather than prohibition and destruction in correlation to the First Amendment. Americans have an obligation to grasp the core idea of free speech for it is the true focal point and embodiment of our democratic system, whereas hurting one’s feelings dismisses the bona fide translation of our first amendment....
Words: 1647 - Pages: 7
...Politics has always been an open field for expression of free speech. Now a day’s many politician are in news for giving hate speeches and hence charged for outraging the societal peace. They got involve in these types of issues just to get more support from any specific community. Some recent cases of hate speech are discussed below: A local court has issued notice to BJP lawmaker Varun Gandhi asking him to appear in court in connection with a 2009 hate speech case few days back. In another recent case police in Telangana have filed charge sheet against MIM leader Akbaruddin Owaisi in the alleged hate speech case few months back. SNDP leader Vellapally Natesan had also faced music of the court in connection with the case registered against him for making an alleged communal hate speech at Aluva. An FIR was lodged against All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslim (AIMIM) legislator AkbaruddinOwaisi by Kishanganj district...
Words: 1693 - Pages: 7
...With unreliable views and values, our culture needs to have unrestricted freedom to speak in relation to whichever and all that alarms us in array to constantly develop our culture. Individual free speech inconsistency would be words that create a constructive, and not pessimistic, picture in mutually long-terms and short-terms. Dictionary.com classifies Freedom of Speech as, “the right of people to express their opinions publicly without governmental interference, subject to the laws against libel, incitement to violence or rebellion, etc.” Freedom of speech is also known as free speech or freedom of expression. Freedom of speech is also known as freedom of expression because a person’s beliefs and thoughts can also be expressed in other ways other than speech. These ways could be art, writings, songs, and other forms of expression. If speaking freely and expressing ourselves freely is supposed to be without any consequence, then why are there constant law suits and consequences for people who do. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression should be exactly what they mean. Although most people believe that they can speak about anything without there being consequences, this is very untrue. One of those spoken things that have consequences is speaking about the president in such a negative way that it sends red flags about your intentions. Because of the high terrorist alerts, people have to limit what they say about bombs, 9/11, and anything they may say out of anger about...
Words: 1993 - Pages: 8
...2018 The Freedom of Speech “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech…” Why should the 1st amendment be changed now? Should groups like the Neo-Nazis be stripped of their constitutional rights? A huge controversy has arisen on whether groups like the Neo-Nazi should have the right to protest and have full freedom of speech. Despite this heated debate, Neo-Nazis should have the right to speak their opinion because of the freedom speech guaranteed in the constitution, the right to purchase a protest permit, and lastly to further prevent rebellion. Neo-Nazis as well as any other group or American citizen have the first amendment right. The first amendment states, “Congress...
Words: 1097 - Pages: 5
...The limitation of free speech on college campuses Many people believe in freedom of speech. Freedom of speech usually exist in democratic countries including the United States of America. Furthermore, The U.S, also known as “Free country” have legalized the freedom of speech in every institution such as school, college, or church. There are many people including myself who are against freedom of speech in specific sectors such as school and college. On the other hand, the University of Missouri believe in the power of free speech even though in some cases it can be offensive. Why should free speech be limited on campuses? When should free speech be limited on campuses? Who should take responsibility of free speech on campuses? Erika Christakis, the the Yale Associate House Matter states, “Free speech and the ability to tolerate offense are the hallmarks of a free and open society” (“Campus adults: protect free speech” 1) and the authorities of the university of Missouri adopted that slogan. I believe that free speech should be limited in the university of Missouri in order to reduce the effects of creating an offensive, demeaning, intimidating, and hostile environment for other students on campus. First, I am against the total freedom of speech in the university of Missouri because it can create an offensive environment on campus. The offense can be directed against other students because of their race, color, religion, sex orientation, age, or disability. The recent events...
Words: 1118 - Pages: 5
...Significant Legal Decisions Involving Hate Speech in America What exactly is Hate Speech? There are many different variations to this answer. According to dictionary.com, it is “speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation” (“hate speech”). Anthony Lewis’ description of hate speech focuses more on the people it aims at: “Hate speech, it is called: virulent attack on Jews, blacks, Muslims, homosexuals, or members of any other group. It is pure hatred, not based on any wrong done by an individual” (157) Throughout history, many cases involving hate speech have been brought to court; each of them differ in their own ways and each brought a significant change to our Constitution. Our country prides itself in having freedom for all, and that includes freedom of speech. But when does freedom of speech cross the line? Many court decisions tried to come up with a solid answer, but there may not ever be a successful way to categorize hate speech. All of the cases covered here played a large part in transforming what the First Amendment covers. America started to recognize the significance of hate speech beginning in 1940, and policies began to form to protect offensive speech. At this point in history, hate speech was better known as “racial and religious propaganda” (Walker 62). The Holocaust was a major turning point for America, because we realized the destruction that it caused, and the government wanted to make sure nothing...
Words: 2890 - Pages: 12
...(above)). A. Thesis Statement: Legalization of same-sex marriage is the result of justice with American bill of rights so it should be protected as a law. B. Arguments- 1. Same-sex marriage is protected from protest assert banning even though freedom of speech from first amendment. 2. Same-sex marriage is protected from homophobic crimes. 3. Same-sex marriage is the result of realization a just society based on bill of rights. II. (Argument 1) – Same-sex marriage is protected from protest assert banning even though freedom of speech from first amendment. A. First amendment provides rights for freedom of speech. 1. First amendment...
Words: 728 - Pages: 3
...Words Have you ever witnessed or been a victim of hate speech because of their or your race, religion or even your sexuality before? In today’s society, it’s been known that all American citizens have the right to speak due to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The First Amendment being any law respecting all that someone has to say also known as freedom of speech. ”To engage in a debate about the First Amendment and racist speech without a full understanding of the nature and extent of that harm is to risk making the First Amendment an instrument of domination rather than a vehicle of liberation” (Lawrence Pg. 345). Hate speech is usually misunderstood because people make careless statements about one another and doesn’t notice or take the time to acknowledge that their form of freedom of speech inflicted damage to the victim. Then again, every person has their own definition of hate speech. Often people say that any negative speech towards a group is considered a form of hate speech; however, church religious groups are against the whole “gay marriage” and just homosexuality in general but they’re still allowed to speak out and protest against America. People are believed that the use of hate speech is to be a violation to the First Amendment but other people think otherwise and is believed that they have the right to say and express whatever they have to say and it’s protected; furthermore, hate speech also causes fear to a person which results in physical...
Words: 1139 - Pages: 5
...always been fighting to have both the most liberty and justice of any sovereign nation. During the mid-eighteen hundreds, the Civil War was a conflict centered around the freedom that African-Americans deserved. In the beginning of 1900s, we were fighting for the rights of women and then later we fought against discrimination of African Americans. Recently, in the early 90s to the 2000s, the fight for gay pride has ensued. Get through all of those issues, bigotry and hate speech still persists, especially directed towards each of the community is listed above. Now in a day and age where, without a college degree, it is believed to be nearly impossible to succeed in the US, the debate of hate speech on campus is ever prevalent....
Words: 1986 - Pages: 8
...of 2002. As a leader of our country, he reminds the Americans that we should be grateful for our freedom. Through contextualizing, structure, and rhetorical appeals, he gets through to his listeners by reminding us all, that keeping peace and freedom is not an easy job to do. He tells us how lucky we are to have freedom, and what we have to do to keep our “homeland” safe for our children of today. He speaks on behalf of his people, and what he will do to keep his people safe from our enemies who “hate” us, because we choose to be free! As President, he is sworn to protect his people, and to keep everything in order in our country. He travels the world to try and promote peace among us and other countries. In this speech that was given by the President, he is speaking to everyone. The General Public, Professionals, Students, and every other citizen. He speaks of freedom and how to protect our “homeland”. He states “the enemies hate us because we have freedom”. (P. #3). As Americans we have the freedom to live where we want to, and how we want to. Most of all we have the “Freedom of Speech”. We voice our opinions when we feel it is necessary, without being punished by the government. In America, we stand together as one nation, to keep peace and freedom! Identifying the structure of Bush’s speech is ways to keep peace and freedom among everyone. In order to keep our freedom, we need to work together to keep our enemies out. He incorporates on how to eliminate all the “bad...
Words: 895 - Pages: 4
...We have it to say very controversial things." (Dailypaul.com.) The issue isn’t about whether racism is good or bad, but whether the government has a legitimate role in intruding into and censoring free speech. It is perfectly appropriate to support the repeal of 18C without directly endorsing racism. Not everything that is considered morally abhorrent by society is criminalised by the government. For example adultery, which is stigmatised by the community, is completely lawful. Possible consequences of committing such an act include breaking up with a spouse, sanctions from private institutions and a damaged reputation. All this can accomplished without government interference. Similar to adultery, racist hate speech should be a matter dealt with by the community and private institutions, not the state. The government does not have a genuine role in regulating dialogue and freedoms ought not to be constrained on the basis of subjective...
Words: 756 - Pages: 4
