Essay On Constitutional Amendment

There has been a long debate about how the citizens of the United States should interpret the constitution. The first amendment protects people's right to speak freely without punishment from the government. Society must distinguish between is speech versus "hate" speech. Hate speech has no place in the country because of the moral destruction it inflicts on the citizens. Additionally, people often use the internet as a way of conveying hate speech, which is a crime known as cyber bullying. The damage that hate speech inflicts on a person obstructs their path in gaining the pursuit of happiness, which is the cornerstones of the nation. The American people are given the right to observe freedom of speech, however, this does not grant freedom

to those who use hate speech against others because it involves the methods of cyber bullying, moral destruction, and the interference with others' right to pursue happiness.
Although there are legal issues with hate speech, the most important factor is the moral damage it causes. Hate speech is defined as speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits. Our nation was established by immigrants from all walks of life, which makes it hypocritical to allow such speech in our country. Hate speech encourages racism and discrimination which often lead to violence and other crimes. Professor Waldron from NYU says, "While hate speech itself may not physically harm anyone, it is an outlet that can lead to greater issues in our nation. Hate speech undermines this public good. It does this not only by intimating discrimination and violence, but by reawakening living nightmares of what this society was like." (American Renaissance). Our country has already overcome tremendous social issues, society needs to learn from the past to ensure a better future.
In addition to the mental pain that hate speech causes, illegal methods are often used to get messages across. In a TED talk, Monica Lewinsky made a good point regarding cyber bullying. She said, "From 2012 to 2013 there was an 87 percent increase in calls and emails related to cyber bullying. For the first time, cyber bullying was leading to suicidal idealization more than offline bullying" (Lewinsky). Cyber bullying is using the internet to threaten, embarrass, or intimidate someone. This criteria go hand in hand with hate speech and are often times associated with one another. If a person is teased for their religion, it is considered hate speech. If this teasing is done over the Internet and it causes embarrassment to the victim, then it is considered cyber bullying, which is illegal. These negative possibilities that involve hate speech all add up to impede a person's path to the pursuit of happiness.
Happiness is a basic human right that should be equally easy to obtain for all people.

If someone is degraded because of factors that they cannot control, it is considered hate speech. The term, "pursuit of happiness" is associated with the American Dream. Regardless of a person's background, race, color, religion, or opinions, they will be treated equally and have the same opportunities as the rest of the nation's citizens. If, however, a person is restricted in their abilities because of statements that harm them mentally, the first amendment becomes secondary. While the pursuit of happiness is not written in the constitution in a way that enables us to monitor it with the law, it is important to remember that it is forever engraved in our nation's history and should be preserved and protected. Despite such overwhelming need to ban hate speech, many people will argue that the first amendment should be interpreted as a means of protecting all speech, even hate speech. Max Ascoli makes a good point regarding freedom of speech. He says, "We cannot start curtailing others' freedom of speech without running the danger of having our own freedom of speech curtailed someday" (Ascoli). The idea is that since everyone thinks differently, the majority should not silence the minority, because one day, our opinions may very well be considered the minority. We would not want our speech to be restricted, so why should others be punished for what they think and say. The first amendment

grants freedom of speech. It does not elaborate as to what type of speech is protected, it simply says "speech". For this reason, we must allow all speech, regardless of its potentially negative nature.
Conclusively, hate speech should not be protected by the first amendment that grants United States citizens the freedom to say what they please. Hate speech is morally wrong and also illegal in many instances. Cyber bullying can result from people wanting to express hate speech. These negative uses of our opinions can easily cause violence, but most importantly, they ruin a person's ability to pursue happiness. Americans are entitled to exercise the rights given to them by the U.S. Constitution, however, the right to use vulgar hate speech to de-moralize fellow Americans is not stated in the document and is destroying the American way of life which which grants liberty, justice and freedom to all.