Stop Voicing Angry Words

575 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Technology and modern society

The use of technology has increased tremendously in too days’ society, especially when using social media, it lets you Interact with people, state your own opinion on certain topics, even reply instantly to people but that comes with pro’s and con’s because you will encounter people that will use angry words. Which is all you see now in the comment sections, but that leaves us the “people” a question to ask, should we stop voicing our opinions just because some choose to use angry words? Or should we voice what we want to say instead of keeping it lingering in our heads, authors Maria Konnikova and Greg Lukianoff both talk about what they think, Lukianoff believes in voicing our opinion even if we have to use angry words. On the other hand, Konnikova, believes voicing angry words is not the way to go. Even though both have valid points, I believe Lukianoff is …show more content…

However, in “Twitter, Hate speech, and the cost of keeping quiet” Lukianoff, believes that our opinions shouldn’t be censored, and we have a right to use angry words, “Hate Speech” “is constitutionally protected in the United States” (Lukianoff, 388)
Even though, Konnikova has reasonable points, I feel that we have a right to say what we want and also, whichever way we want to say it, it was written in the 1st Amendment for us because of a reason to share what we want and whatever is on our mind, it’s better to say what we want rather than sugar coating it. People think that we should just share the good news rather than the bad news and if the bad news should be shared some of society thinks it should be censored and prohibit angry words. “But it is especially important for a free society to learn not just the good news but the bad as well.” (Lukianoff,

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of The Hell You Say By Kelefa Sanneh

    1322 Words  | 3 Pages

    Creating a safe space is more important for some rather than others. In “The Hell You Say” by Kelefa Sanneh for The New Yorker, he provides an interesting look at the views of Americans who support censorship of speech and those who are completely against it. Another issue I gathered from his article was that people use their right to free speech in wrong ways and end up harassing people. Providing two sides of a controversial debate, his article makes us think of which side we are on. So, whether or not censorship should be enforced; and how the argument for free speech is not always for the right reason, Sanneh explores this with us.

    Read More

  • The Right to Freedom of Expression: R. v. Keegstra

    2813 Words  | 6 Pages

    Entrenched within the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms lies the fundamental rights that Canadian citizens share. The primary freedoms recognized within Section 2 of the Charter, such as the freedom of speech and expression, are necessary for a free and democratic society. Yet, a crucial conflict of rights exists within the system when the freedom of expression is used to perpetuate willful hatred against a certain individual or group. Controversy arises from this conflict first and foremost because the freedom of expression is meant to secure each person the right to express ideas and opinions without governmental interference, irrespective of what that opinion may be. In this paper, I will discuss the conflicting views of restricting the freedom of expression when it is used to promote hatred. I refer to the insights offered by Joel Feinberg and Joseph Raz to advance the view that the “right” to freedom of expression is not final and absolute, as expressions of hated do in fact cause real harm to people, and there rights too must be taken into consideration. Fundamental rights should be viewed as a privilege, which includes a responsibility to respect and value the rights of others to provide for a truly liberal democracy. I will refer to the landmark judicial decision in the Canadian Supreme Court case of R. v. Keegstra to argue that the rights of individuals and groups to be afforded the right to respect and dignity outweigh any claim to freedom of expression.

    Read More

  • Annotated Bibliography Should A Person's Freedom Of Speech Be Limited In Any Way?

    1153 Words  | 3 Pages

    This source supplies my paper with more evidence of how freedom of speech is in a dangerous place. American has always stood by freedom of speech, and to see how social media platforms try to manipulate and take off as the choose to increase slight bias is unpleasant. The article establishes a worry to the fellow readers that hold freedom of speech so high and that it is at risk. The article manages to explain why freedom of speech is in danger, and why there should be no limits to free speech.

    Read More

  • We are Free to Be You, Me, Stupid and Dead by Roger Rosenblatt

    1178 Words  | 3 Pages

    Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”. Although this amendment gave people the right express thier opinions, it still rests in one’s own hands as how far they will go to exercise that right of freedom of speech.

    Read More

  • Symbolic Speech Should Be Protected

    2507 Words  | 6 Pages

    1. The measure of a great society is the ability of its citizens to tolerate the viewpoints of those with whom they disagree. As Voltaire once said, “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” (Columbia). This right to express one's opinion can be characterized as “freedom of speech.” The concept of “freedom of speech” is a Constitutional right in the United States, guaranteed under the First Amendment to the Constitution:

    Read More

  • Freedom Of Speech: The Second Amendment To The First Amendment

    1466 Words  | 3 Pages

    When the individual gets attacked verbally because of their controversial statements, they claim that they had the right to speak their mind no matter how disturbing their words were. They use the First Amendment as a cover for their wrong-doings, and that is never okay. They need to be educated on what they can and cannot say. Just because the First Amendment guarantees a person the freedom of speech, does not mean that they are entitled to say whatever they please. The article “Freedom of Speech” explains if an individual were to use “fighting words” then they are automatically not covered under their First Amendment. The Supreme Court decided in the case Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire that “fighting words” were not constitutional, so they would not be protected under the First Amendment (2). Many people misunderstand that much of their opinions that they speak consists of words that are unclear. More than half of the time the words they use in their statements are considered to be fighting words, for they are rude and ignorant. There is no need for the obscene words that they use to be protected under the First Amendment. They must become aware of their lack of knowledge for what “fighting words” are; furthermore, they

    Read More

  • Civil Liberties

    1322 Words  | 3 Pages

    Critics believe that American citizens take advantage of civil liberties supporting limits on freedom of speech. They believe that degradation of humanity is inherent in unregulated speech. For example, according to Delgado and Stefancic, a larger or more authoritative person can use hate speech to physically threaten and intimidate those who are less significant (qtd. in Martin 49). Freedom of speech can also be used to demoralize ethnic and religious minorities. Author Liam Martin, points out that if one wants to state that a minority is inferior, one must prove it scientifically (45-46). Discouraging minorities can lead to retaliation, possibly resulting in crimes or threatening situations. "Then, the response is internalized, as it must be, for talking back will be futile or even dangerous. In fact, many hate crimes have taken place when the victim did just that-spoke back to the aggressor and paid with his or her life" (qtd. in Martin 49). Therefore, critics believe that Americans do not take into account the harm they may cause people and support limits on freedom of speech.

    Read More

  • Freedom Of Speech

    1364 Words  | 3 Pages

    Instead, Bok suggests that we address the problem by communicating with those who are causing these disturbances and understand . Also in the essay, “Freedom of Speech Means Freedom to Hate”, Christopher Hitchens explains why banning those hate speeches may be an unwise decision for society as a whole as freedom of speech does sometimes prevent the tyranny of majority from happening. While the essay, “Why Women Aren’t Welcome on the Internet”, Amanda Hess makes for the argument that the internet have become a new and terrifying way for people to bully women who uses it. The last article, “The Case for Censoring Hate Speech,” Sean McElwee argues that censoring is required to help protect the minorities and to foster a better society. Freedom of expression should not be limited for limiting speech does not help solve the root problem and it would be near impossible for any person to regulate what people are allowed to say and not allowed to say without having any sort of bias against anyone in

    Read More

  • How Does Internet Hate Speech Affect Teens

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    In 1517, a man named Martin Luther wrote and posted his 95 theses on the walls of a church. The 95 theses protested the Church’s selling of indulgences. At the time, many people viewed this as hate speech, and it brought conflict amongst the Catholic Church. Additionally, Luther was threatened to be burned at the stake by Indulgence Priest Tetzel. Despite the fact that this historical example wasn’t via the internet, it is a valid connection of how hate speech can be extremely harmful to both individuals and greater society. In modern day society, the internet is one of the most powerful and influential tools to spread ideas, videos and pictures. However, when people use it to spread hate speech, it must be regulated in order to help prevent adolescent suicide, hate crimes, and danger for

    Read More

  • Hate Speech Codes: A Theoretical Analysis

    1066 Words  | 3 Pages

    Alongside diminishing harm, hate speech codes produce other benefits. Higher education institutions are the ideal forum for views to be debated using logical argument. A major portion of a student’s education is in learning how to derive and rationally support an opinion. The realm of speech that these codes target is not portrayed rationally or used to rouse discussion. In fact, hate speech is usually used to prompt

    Read More

  • Examples Of Inequality In The United States

    922 Words  | 2 Pages

    Since these issues have caused negative diversity, social network accounts like Twitter has put up a campaign to stop the abuse of free speech that is spoken or written on social networks. In the article of Fox 12 Oregon, Twitter states that “The company said Tuesday that it has begun identifying people who have been banned for abusive behavior and it will stop them from creating new accounts” (Ortutay). The purpose to create the new idea is to keep a safe environment for Twitter is to minimize all the social negative abuse that goes on the internet to the real world. Like it says in the reading, “being able to connect with anyone in the world who has similar interests may mean that one’s own community becomes less important” (Giddens el al. 2017: 198). The quote answers the question of growing existing inequalities, the more the hatred on social networks, the more it goes viral

    Read More

  • Freedom Of Speech Should be Limited

    1338 Words  | 3 Pages

    Freedom of speech cannot be considered an absolute freedom, and even society and the legal system recognize the boundaries or general situations where the speech should not be protected. Along with rights comes civil responsib...

    Read More

  • Cyber Bullying and Hate Speech

    1170 Words  | 3 Pages

    Banks, James. Regulating Hate Speech Online. (2010) International Review of Law, Computers & Technology. 2Vol. 24, No. 3, November 2010, 233−239

    Read More

  • The Importance Of Freedom Of Speech In Vietnam And Vietnam

    1338 Words  | 3 Pages

    First of all, freedom of speech on social media. Social media is strongly developing nowadays. On social media, free speech is everywhere. Noel Diem demonstrates “it is a way for some people to vent their anger without feeling self-conscious, nervous, or upset without resorting to violent actions” (3). Americans feel free to speak out their opinions and feelings at everywhere, even on social media. Everyone can acknowledge that people might

    Read More

  • Freedom of Expression Is Vital to a Free Society

    1115 Words  | 3 Pages

    The First Amendment of the United States Constitution states, “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.” Does this mean that freedom of speech cannot be prohibited in any way? Are there any reasonable arguments for limiting speech? In this paper, these questions will be examined along with a discussion of where the basic right of free speech originated. Today, society or government can attempt to regulate speech, but it cannot prevent it if a person is within the parameters of his or her constitutional rights.

    Read More

More about Stop Voicing Angry Words

Open Document