English // Is it ever right for governments to restrict freedom of speech?
[Student]
[Professor]
[Subject]
[Date]
Government impositions to restrict the Freedom of Speech
like the United Nations. In fact, the United Nations stated that the right to the freedom of expression is a fundamental and foundational human right which should be an indispensable component of any thriving society (International Center for Not-For-Profit Law). In the case of the US, the freedom of speech is inclusive of the First Amendment which specifies that, “prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, ensuring that there is no prohibition on the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances” (Emerson). However, it must be noted that while the First Amendment served to protect the freedom of the people to express their opinion, there are limitations and boundaries that need to be set. The Supreme Court has determined in several cases the limitations of the freedom of speech as it believes that the drafter of the Constitution was not aware of the possible developments and breakthroughs which might abuse this right. Similarly, the Constitution has always been used by people to argue their way against the violation of certain rights of people. One of the laws the people love to use to protect them from abusing their freedom is the right to free speech. While the First Amendment was designed to protect the people from being silenced and airing out their grievances against the government, it still comes with limitations because of the possibility that it can be abused if used wrongly. The Supreme Court therefore qualifies certain categories of speech which has been qualified as not protected by the First Amendment. Among these include: (a) child pornography, (b) obscenity, (c) fighting words or threats (Ruane). Likewise, the United Nations enumerated the following restrictions on the Law on Freedom of Expression stated under Article 19. According to the United Nations, the freedom of speech, although expansive in nature is not absolute. It should come equip with duties and responsibilities. Among the qualifications of the freedom of speech requires that it follows the strict adherence of not violating the rights of others, thus must assume to respect the reputation and rights of others, and it must ensure to maintain national security, and public order without compromising public morals and public health (International Center for Not-For-Profit Law 3).
By virtue of all these facts, it can then be argued that the government has the right to impose restriction of free speech. Many people had already committed suicide because of being publicly humiliated and scandalized, especially online. Violators argue that they have the right to express themselves and air their opinion especially if their use their peronal accounts on Facebook and other social platform. However, these irresponsible people were not given the right to humiliate others just because they argue that they are entitled to their own opinion. While it is true that everyone is entitled to their opinion, no one is entitled to destroy another person’s life. These people should be just as liable as murders and should be punished with the same penalties as murders for pushing another individual to take their own lives out of desperation and humiliation. The right to free speech does not give people the right to hurt others. Words cannot be taken back when they are already spoken. And the damage might be irreversable.
Work Cited
Emerson, Thomas I. “Toward a General Theory of the First Amendment.” Yale Law Journal (1963): 877–956. Print.
International Center for Not-For-Profit Law. “The Right to Freedom of Expression: Restrictions on a Foundational Right.” 10 July 2010. International Center for Not-For-Profit Law Website. Web. 27 September 2017.
Ruane, Kathleen Ann. “Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions to the First Amendment.” 8 September 2014. Federation of American Scientist Website. Web. 27 September 2017.
2017/5204
