America's Freedom Of Speech example essay topic

"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". This is stated in the First Amendment of the United States of America. Since this was ratified on December 15, 1971, it guarantees Americans four freedoms: freedom of religion, speech, press and assembly. Since that time, those freedoms have been discussed, debated, fought and died for. Millions of immigrants have come to America to secure those freedoms that America has and other countries dream about. The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing, and believed in the power of ideas and debate, not censorship.

If America abolished its Freedom of Speech, the whole country would be affected. Not only would people be less informed, there would be a social change, a decrease in common knowledge, and accountability. Very nicely done! Make sure that your pronoun antecedents are clear (e.g. "this") and watch your capitalization (e.g. Freedom of Speech). The freedom of speech concept came from England. During the Glorious Revolution of 1688, King James II was overthrown, and then William and Mary were put in as joint monarchs.

The following year, the English Parliament secured a Bill of Rights from William and Mary that granted "freedom of speech in Parliament". One hundred years later our founding fathers were wise enough to expand that principle to everyone, not just members of Parliament. Censorship often raises its ugly head during trying times when our nation faces difficult, seemingly insoluble problems. That is why Justice Louis Brandeis opined in Whitney vs. California in 1927, "Fear of serious injury cannot alone justify suppression of free speech and assembly.

Men feared witches and burned women. It is the function of speech to free men from the bondage of irrational fears". Brandeis knew what Jefferson knew? reason and free speech, not fear and censorship, should prevail. The Supreme Court reaffirmed this position in its 1997 decision on the Communications Decency Act (CDA) that sought to limit material placed on the Internet. The high court struck down the law. In an opinion written by Justice John Paul Stevens, the high court decided, "Notwithstanding the legitimacy and importance of the congressional goal of protecting children from harmful materials, we agree with the three-judge district court that the statute abridges the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment".

Good historical information, but a bit scattered. Why bring up England? Moreover, you forgot about sedition laws which were nasty, nasty things in England. Anyway, I'd recommend that if you want to keep your info about England then you relate it to America in some way. e.g. America based it's constitutional laws on the English model which came into being... You may not need it, tho. Also, be careful with your using loaded words.

There have been many of times that America's Freedom of Speech has almost been taken away. People argue that the people of America are exposed to many things that are not needed. Hate speech is one of the main arguments. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1942, in a case called Chaplin sky vs. New Hampshire, that intimidating speech directed at a specific individual in a face-to-face confrontation amounts to "fighting words", and that the person engaging in such speech can be punished if "by their very utterance [the words] inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace". For example, a white student stops a black student on campus and utters a racial slur. In that one-on-one confrontation, which could easily come to blows, the offending student could be disciplined under the "fighting words" doctrine for racial harassment.

Over the past 50 years, however, the Court hasn't found the "fighting words" doctrine applicable in any of the hate speech cases that have come before it, since the incidents involved didn't meet the narrow criteria stated above. Perhaps a break here might be useful -- otherwise it's a mighty long paragraph. Also, why do we need to know about fighting words. Give us context. How is it important to YOUR argument? Hate speech has been around for as long as anyone can recall.

If we had censorship, the world would just be ignorant because everyone knows what the racial slurs, comments, and stereotypes are. For example, the was introduced in 1865. Because of all the killings, burnings, and racism, the has taken on many stereotypes. The effects of the group were well known to the African American community. The symbols of the white cloaks, burning crosses, and racism can be considered? hate speech? Society is self-regulating.

The link between speech acts and physical acts is a false one: people who commit hate crimes are likely to have read hate speech, as people who commit sex crimes are likely to have watched pornography, but not necessarily the other way around. Viewers of pornography and readers of hate speech are therefore not incited to commit anything they otherwise would not do. By exposing pornography, hate speech and political polemic to society, the likelihood that it will be discredited and defeated is increased, rather than strengthened through persecution. This is Milton's argument from "Areopagitica" (1644) - truth will combat error. If America adopted the idea of censorship, the students and common person would not be able to investigate this kind of information, making the world less informed. The first two sentences do not logically follow.

Milton's argument is an excellent one to use. I would reconsider your argument with the. Their symbols are well known, but even if they were censored, the hate for which they stand would still exist. By allowing their ideological stance to be made public, it allows others to understand what their position is and to either reject or embrace it. However, it is more likely that the untenable nature of their position would most likely cause any rational and logical observer to conclude that their stance is a bunch of horse poo. I think this is what you are trying to argue, but it is not clear.

Think of the argument that you " re trying to make in the broadest sense -- following Milton's assertion (which is really what you are trying to prove). Then create a causal argument from that. THEN, use the as an example. If censorship became a reality, America would experience a complete social change. Information would not be able to be accessed. Students would not be able to learn about many things in history that shaped the world to what it is today.

The very first explorations of the world would not be discussed or taught. The Civil War would be unspoken. America's history would be unheard of. World Wars would be unsaid. Students would be learning about America and her constitution, but would not know why, who, or how the country became who she is today.

How are you coming to the conclusion that censorship would lead to intellectual stagnation. What are you using to support these claims? What are the grounds of your argument? Is your argument that only one version of events would be told -- the monoglossic one (that is, the one that those in power approve of). Again, make your argument in the broadest terms and then provide examples and evidence.

Not only would the youth of America be deprived, the public would be too. News would be a thing of the past. Any military issues that America was involved in would not be able to be aired or spoken about. The public would not be able to be involved, creating a big dilemma. Erin Brochavich, for example, was able to research a topic, get involved, and solve a problem that had occurred for many years. If America had censorship, the ability to report on issues and its changes would be deducted.

People would no longer be able to be involved and there would no longer be a freedom of retrieval of information, causing America to be less informed and less involved. Some holidays would be non-existent such as Veteran's Day, Memorial Day, and 4th of July because the information of why they were celebrated would not be available. America would be affected in many ways. Again, what is your evidence for this position. What is your basic position? It's not clear -- which is not good.

Is it that there would be no ability to muckrake and affect any kind of social change within the country? What is the importance of holidays? Are you equating an America with censorship policies with a totalitarian one? If freedom of speech was no longer present, science would come to a standstill. Science itself is built on other people's discoveries and information. Leonardo Da Vinci got arrested for reporting his discovery that the sun was the center of the universe in the fifteenth century (Goldfield 506).

Darwin became a mockery of society when he introduced his theory of evolution to the public in the nineteenth century (Goldfield 588). In 1879, Thomas Edison unveiled his invention of the light bulb, changing technology forever (Goldfield 581). Science progresses as more discoveries are made and shared. With censorship, all of these scientific findings would not have been published, and the discoveries of today would be affected. If scientific findings were not publicized, further findings would be impossible. Sun is the center of the galaxy.

Did Leo say universe? You need to strengthen this argument. Can you truly say that science would come to a standstill or would it just take longer to achieve things if there was no free exchange of information? Why are the contributions of Leo and Darwin important?

How have they changed the world? Why is scientific progress necessary and important? You " re making a huge charge -- can you back it with evidence? There are many things about the world that is still unknown.

Cancer is a disease that effects people world-wide. AIDS is also a terrible disease that has become an epidemic because of how quickly it is spreading. If the cure was found, it would be a huge victory for mankind. The cure for cancer and AIDS would be a long lost dream because any progress that was made would be kept quiet and individuals would be able to work on it, possibly making the same discoveries. Outer space and the ocean still are not fully understood. If censorship was present, more amazing discoveries could be made but not discussed.

The world would know that certain things such as black holes were present, but the cause or reason would stay unknown forever. Society was built on the information given by other people. If freedom of speech was subtracted from the American people, it would cause new discoveries from being shared and would diminish the hopes for new data. Ok, does it follow that if there were censorship the cure for cancer and AIDS would not be found? Hasty generalization. Your conclusions do not follow from your argument.

Re-consider and provide evidence. Accountability would also be affected by censorship. In 1967, the Freedom of Information Act was passed but the investigatory files compiled for law enforcement purposes were still kept from public access. In general, all FBI files were out of the public's reach. By the end of 1975, amendments to the Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act of 1974 went into effect.

The passage of these laws provided for broad access to FBI records which had been severely limited previously. This was a big change in American society. If the general public now had access to FBI files, more people would be able to get involved and have access to information that was never accessible before. This is a new argument, no?

What is the main point of it? Big change doesn't argue much. What exactly are you trying to prove? Don't be vague. Be very specific. When the first amendment was written and ratified, freedom of speech was granted, making America a place of happiness.

Censorship would deplete America of most of her God given rights, which would make the general public less informed, involved, and knowledgeable and would create less accountability. Freedom of speech is what the American society has been built on. If freedom of speech was no longer present, the whole world would feel its effects.