Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
3 reasons why students should have freedom of speech at universities
The importance of freedom of expression
First amendment freedom of speech
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The first amendment entitles the right to freedom of expression, which includes freedom of speech. Freedom of speech allows us the right to express our opinions without government interference. So you have the right to talk about the government, the president and, whomever as long as it does not incite violence. But why do universities feel as if they could take away free speech from individuals. This is why free speech zones are a necessity and, should be allowed on college campuses. Without these zones we mock the idea of expression that the first amendment gives us. Main Idea I: Free speech zones are important because the allow students to exchange ideas in a civilized manner. A. College is supposed to be a place of higher education where
you learn openly, draw new ideas, drop or confirm values and, explore new thoughts if we take away these rights then America being the land of the free is a contradiction. B. Free speech zones allow students and staff alike to openly discuss/debate issues because in school environment you can’t teach everything because it can go against someone’s beliefs (religion, etc.). Without these zones we would never know what issues are because no one who talked about them. Administration fears prejudices but, regardless if free speech is banned prejudice will always exist. Issues can never be resolved because no one can talk about them that’s why we need speech zones to share with our peers. Many rebuttal that speech zones would only incite violence. Because they target minorities etc. but, if done in a controlled/civilized manner it would allow the opinion and ideas of everyone to be expressed. Regardless of what is said as long as it doesn’t incite violence it should be allowed if censorship of speech exist we mock the very idea of the first amendment.
One reason why schools shouldn't limit students' online speech is that students have the freedom of speech which says that they can express themselves and have their own opinion.
On the other hand, students have the right to speak out for what they believe in without having any interference; they have the right to voice their opinion. This protection is all due to the first amendment protection. The first amendment protects the students and also the teachers’ freedom of speech, that includes during and out of school. With the protection of the first amendment no person is able to violate your right to freedom of speech. Any pers...
Free speech gives the government an opportunity to listen to what the people want in a peaceful manner. When taking a peaceful approach and creating an improved system, the likelihood of the government responding and making changes becomes
Being expression one of the most important rights of the people to maintain a connected society right to speech should be accepted to do so. The first amendment is one of the most fundamental rights that individuals have. It is fundamental to the existence of democracy and the respect of human dignity. This amendment describes the principal rights of the citizens of the United States. If the citizens were unable to criticize the government, it would be impossible to regulate order. By looking freedom of speech there is also freedom of assembly and freedom of press that are crucial for the United States democracy.
This is just down right wrong because it’s unwarranted to give the right to do such a thing to schools and not to government. Thesis Schools have more rights than the government to affect and restrict the 1st Amendment and freedom of speech. Annotated Bibliography Hudson, David L., JR. " First Amendment Center. "
Total freedom does not exist. Being American has made some people believe that they have the freedom to do whatever they want, but this isn’t the case. In this day and age students are free to use texting, social media, and they also have access to various other things on the internet. Some students use these resources responsibly and do not abuse these methods, but on the other hand some students use these resources immaturely and usually cause great dilemmas that can extend to their school life. Consequently, schools should be allowed to limit students’ online speech because cyberbullying can cause widespread problems among both students and teachers, it disrupts learning, and it violates students’ civil rights.
The purpose of this paper is to explore the topic of freedom of speech and free speech zones on college campuses. This paper will answer the questions: Why have so many Universities who protect academic freedom, retreat into fear of freedom? Are school officials afraid of debate and disagreement? Are they trying to keep people (outside the zone) from hearing words that may offend someone? These questions will be answered through analyses of previous court cases, journal articles and news articles.
Since this country was founded, we have had a set of unalienable rights that our constitution guarantees us to as Americans. One of the most important rights that is mentioned in our constitution is the right to free speech. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
And even though the First Amendment grants us the freedom of speech, including such hate speech, there are limits. The federal and all state governments, including public colleges and universities and private schools that accept federal financial aid, cannot unnecessarily regulate speech, with the following exceptions: “obscenity, figh...
This occurs even when the regulations arent enforced souly because they fear being punished for what they may say. As shown in Silverglate and Lukianoffs essay, some campuses go to great extents when giving students permission to give free speeches. They claim that “as long as the policy exists, the threat of enfocement remains real and will inevitably influence some peoples speech” (636). This is a valid argument because they then proceed by saying that The First Amendment calls it a clinging effect. Another effect of these regulations would be that colleges are teaching their students that their opinions and beliefs should not be shared when they are even slightly controversial. Wasserman argues that word choice is an “essential component of free-speech protection”(640) because they allow one to express him or herself
In the United States, free speech is protected by the First Amendment in which it states, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion … or abridging the freedom of speech.” Now, nearly 250 years into the future, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were afraid of is starting to happen. Today, our freedom of speech is being threatened through different forces, such as the tyranny of the majority, the protection of the minority, and the stability of the society. Now, colleges and universities in the United States today are also trying to institute a code upon its students that would bar them from exercising their right to speak freely in the name of protecting minorities from getting bullied. This brings us into
Earlier this month in April, student protestors rioted at Berkley University because they did not want certain Conservative guest speakers to be able to give speeches at the university due to some of the speakers comments being inappropriate. According to the nonprofit organization committed to defending civil liberties named The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), "One worrisome trend undermining open discourse in the academy is the increased push by some students and faculty to 'disinvite' speakers with whom they disagree from campus appearances" (The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education). While the protesters were practicing their first amendment right to petition, the students were infringing upon the Conservative speakers freedom of speech which is unconstitutional. Just because the protesters may have disagreed with the speakers comments, does not mean that theys hould have prevented them from being able to express them. This is similar to the novel 1984 because the protestors controlled and censored what was able to be said at Berkeley University, just like how in the novel the Thought Police controlled what citizens said just because The Party disagreed with certain perspectives and didn’t want certain information to be
The Fourteenth Amendment extends the right of free speech to state and local governments as well as government-run institutions (public schools, colleges, and universities). Private schools are not restricted, yet most choose to adopt the policies of free speech anyways or are mandated to do so by the state governments.[3] The key words to notice here are “public” and “private”, as they can easily demonstrate the right to free speech. If the free speech takes place in a public forum, such as in books or at the park, then it cannot be censored. However, if it takes place in a private forum, such as within a private building or organization, then the free speech can be censored.
Freedom of speech has many positive things, one of which is the help it gives on decision-making. Thanks to freedom of speech it is possible to express personal ideas without fear or restraints; therefore, all the perspectives and options will be on the table, giving people more opportunities to choose from. Nevertheless, everything in life has a limit, and the limit of freedom of speech depends directly on the consideration of the rights of others. People is free of believing what they want, thinking what they want, and even saying what they want, everything as long as they do not intrude or violate anyone else's rights. Under certain circumstances freedom of speech should be limited, and this is more than just a political action, this acts represent the urge for tolerance and the need for respect.
Many Universities around the country, especially Ivy league schools, are dealing with students and faculty repressing other’s freedom of speech. However, they aren't the only ones. Many journalism outlets such as Fox News, MSNBC, and Rush Limbaugh act the same way. This is due to the conflicting ideologies that party’s side with. Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, has discussed this topic and his ideology. I believe that a citizens speech shouldn't be repressed based on the principles of respect, constructive criticism, and neutrality. As the founding fathers debated the constitution of the United States, we must work together as a whole to create a greater way of life for everyone.