Text Preview
The first Amendment: 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. The First Amendment became the law in January 16, 1786, and it protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference. This amendment also allows the citizens of the United States freedom of expression and consists of the rights to freedom of speech, press, assembly and the right for citizens to petition the government regarding grievances, and it also implies that we all have the right to our own beliefs.

Taking a glance of what I have learned about the First Amendment, I realize that this amendment is the most important and one of the easiest to understand. I say that because it is short, uncomplicated, understandable, simple, and about as unambiguous as you can get. The 4 terms such as, "make", "shall", "freedom", and "abridging", have clear meanings in everyday language. What I like most is that Congress cannot pass one law that will in any way, shape, or form limits the power of any person or body to speak or to publish. In this paper I will discuss what the First Amendment does for me, evaluate the responsibilities that the Constitution gave to me as an American citizen, discuss a few cases related to the three provisions of the First Amendment, and why these case(s) needed to be heard and interpreted by the Supreme Court. I will also discuss how the Supreme Court's decision in each case continues to affect American's rights today.

One case that I found was extremely interesting; it is the Boy Scouts of America vs. Dale. This case was argued in April 26, 2000 and was decided on June 28, 2000. Dale's application and acceptance to the Boy Scouts was revoked when the Boy Scouts learned that he is a homosexual and gay rights activist. When this happened, Dale believed that his rights were violated because the state statute prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and Dale decided to bring a lawsuit upon the Boy Scouts of America. The Boy Scouts argued "that homosexual conduct is inconsistent with the values embodied in the Scout Oath and Law, particularly those represented by the terms "morally straight" and "clean," and does not want to promote homosexual conduct." (Boy scouts of America v. Dale)The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that application of a public-accommodation law to force the Boy Scouts to accept a gay scoutmaster is a violation of the private organization's freedom of association guaranteed by the First Amendment. The court began to inquire about homosexual presence and expressed many different points of view. They looked at Dale as a community leader and good citizen who was open and expressive enough to share his sexuality but the court found that his presence would interfere with Scouts' choice not to propound a point of view contrary to homosexual beliefs.

I believed that the nature of this case needed to be heard and interpreted by the Supreme Court because many of us think that the First Amendment is a key that will allow us the entry of any door we choose, in my opinion that is the wrong point of view. I also believe that private institutions should be allowed to pick and choose who and what messages they would like to send to the public, and if you don't agree with it then you are free to start a group of your own. The Boy Scouts are teaching and sending messages throughout the world and their message should be heard loud, clear, and undistorted. If my values differ from yours then I will not allow you to represent me or my group. Also, I would not allow role models whom I feel are inappropriate to speak on my behalf concerning values, and morals, especially to the younger generation. For example, if you belong to a Christian church and suddenly...
tracking img