The Freedom of Free Speech - Essay Sample

Introduction

In this age of technology, freedom of expression is for everyone and whether a speech is deemed offensive or not, everyone needs to be accountable. Such people do not appear to care for what they say because, even though they are not prosecuted, they should be mindful of the horrible effects of hate speech. It would never be atopically regarded if a speech did not matter whether it is dull or not, but now things must be made plain and boundaries must be drawn on what should and should not be said. However, there are numerous ways to interpret and use a speech; negative and offensive.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Hate Speech

Most students want to defend their students from hate speech. They want to create an environment in which they can speak and express their opinions freely. You may act hatefully, but that does not cause it to be prosecuted. Professor Erwin offers possible options. This only arises where the talk did not mean harm, but did not display any consideration. It is because language is used as a weapon and should be secured. It can also have beneficial and severe consequences It also has forms poor. It can be dull and disrespectful; it is therefore important to know what to say and what to say.

Offensive speech is protected and speech of hostility is protected and you cannot speak dismiss anyone in court whether the speech was accidental and ambiguous. Some students may pronounce terms that are offensive and that is where the line is drawn and profane speech is restricted.

When a speech becomes repetitive and addresses certain people immediately, it should be confined and halted. Campus-speakers who purposely talk hatred in order to harm a particular party could have had little opportunity or not, when the goal is to propagate hatred. In most cases, the school administrators are powerless to avoid the crowd, but can alert their students in advance. Students will also respond and hold demonstrations in inflammatory speeches. You would limit the voice that they want to hear safely. Freedom of speech remains, but if you consider like the voice is objectionable, the viewer has the right to go elsewhere. The word hurt, as in the report, indicates that the conversation is not successful and the crowd was unhappy. Offend is often used to mean that the viewer did not appreciate it for week, but it is not so negative. Freedom of speech is that anyone can utter what they want in those joints and no enforcement is permitted on them. Yet it becomes immediately an argument for violation of your private life as they come to your home and say harmful words. Hate speech should not mean evil; words that do not mean harm should be covered.

Freedom of Expression

This example serves to illustrate the need for freedom of expression in a meaningful way. The case emerged after the suspended junior MatThew N. Fraser at Bethel High School in Pierce County, Washington for speaking at a student assembly with laid sexual references. The speech Fraser made, choosing a classmate for an elective student's bureau, called a student "good in his trousers."

Fraser was charged in the district court following the school officials' suspension. Fraser was held by a federal judge of district and a Federal Appellate Judge to be in violation of his First Amendment Protections. In an ironical twist of fate, Fraser 's actions allowed his high school graduation to give the starting address. The school called on the United States the Supreme Court, by a margin of 7-2 prevailed. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger was the author of the majority decision. Fraser argued that he had a right to first change political expression in compliance with the Tinker Rules which would shield the vast majority of his expression from significant interruption.

Regarding the freedom of free speech case, Marshall wrote that school administrators were unable to illustrate the perturbing expression of Fraser. Stevens started his dissident tale by citing the popular Gone With the Wind line, 'Frankly, my love, I am not making a goddamn.' Stevens wrote: 'If a student can be disciplined for using offensive words, he is entitled to be equally conscious of the extent of the prohibition and its implications. The free expression interest under the first amendment is secured and ... The clause on due process ... Combine this conclusion to require.

Moreover, the Court was side by side with the administrators of the academy. In Tinker's political voice, Burger acknowledged a "marked differentiation" from Fraser's sexual expression. "The unquestionable right in classrooms and in schools to endorse divisive and contentious opinions needs to be weighed against the countervailing consideration of socially appropriate instruction of pupils," he wrote. Burger. Judge William J. Brennan Jr. accepted that school administrators should punish Fraser, so they would fairly foresee that his expression will be harmful. "It will definitely be an acceptable feature of high school education to forbid the use of obscene and insulting words during public expression."

The ruling will continue to be important in the sense of public schooling, as it requires school administrators to discipline pupils for profane and unholy terms. Any lower courts have read the Fraser case in such a broad way and have decided, for example, that it is openly racist and it may preclude any Confederate flagship.

In yet another different case regarding student’s freedom to free speech, Education lawyers said that the constitutional conduct of an administrator while a student was wearing clothes reflecting a precarious point of view is not always clear. The response, said the lawyers, depends on factors such as school history and student body composition. A Michigan chapter spokesperson for the Union of Civil Liberties, Wendy Wagenheim, said, "The school will hopefully know that it should talk or else we will strongly pursue action in the next week."

Conclusion

The rule was dictatorship over the mind throughout history. Before the first amendment to America defined freedom of expression as a fundamental premise of our democracy, citizens were permitted to speak only through government imprimatur. This wording may not be simpler or more absolute: regardless of who disagrees with you nor finds your speech to be objectionable, the government does not abridge your rights of speech. The first amendment states that "Congress does not pass legislation abridging freedom of expression or the press." Free expression is the defense of the literary, academic and scientific spirit.

Deductively, the full freedom to share one 's thoughts unless one infringes other people's rights. Freedom of speech means that no American should fear Galileo 's destiny, which he has been prosecuted because he has been too bold to claim scientific truths contradicting the teachings of the official Church or Socrates, for undermining the Establishment. In public spaces you are free to speak, and no action can be taken on them, however the argument you like. A expression should be safeguarded, and there should be a constructive way to fix it if it is controversial, not just aggression. Hurtful words are dangerous and insulting, such that a pleasant atmosphere is avoided.

Works Cited

Sadruddin, Munir Moosa, and John Douglass. "Exploring elements of human rights in educational policies at the higher education level, and identifying the challenges faced by higher education to promote human rights values: A case of Pakistan and USA." Available at SSRN 3308573 (2018).