1988 was a great year for Larry Flynt, the publisher of a highly criticized magazine called, “Hustler.” This magazine was unlike any of its predictors, such as Playboy. While sexuality was on the rise, so were “new” ways to do it. Hustlers’ publisher, Larry Flynt was merely exposing what people were already doing. This does not mean that everyone had the same sexual desires as everyone else, but he did become popularized by certain “hardcore” sexually active persons. While he became a hero amongst some, there seems to have been more against what Flynt was doing. It has been documented that even some of his staff did not agree, saying that he was making men out to be rapists, and making comparisons to men being like “stud bulls,” wanting to have sex with “everything in sight.”…
Moral Relativism is the thought that the moral beliefs held by individuals is influenced and dependent on the culture in which they live in considers tolerable. Hence, what is considered morally appropriate in a single society perhaps is perceived as immoral in a different society. In actuality they both maybe right as they have distinct creators resulting in different laws, diversity, and possibly religious views of each other. Ruth Benedict defends the theory of moral relativism in her article A Defense of Moral Relativism from The Journal of General Psychology. In contrast, William B. Irvine author of Confronting Relativism feels in a few swift examples people can be talked out of their views on moral…
The always extolled US Constitutional First Amendment right to free speech, and the exercise of it, is in truth penultimate to and contingent upon the right to revolution and rebellion as the ultimate and last resort and stand. For the right to free speech is nothing at all but an empty and servile rhetoric without the implied resolve to fight to the death for it in the last instance. Thus also the Second Amendment’s purpose is to provide the people with the ways and means to effect the intrinsic right to revolution/rebellion in guarding against abusive centralized power. As Jefferson stated, the Second Amendment is constructed for the purposes of the peoples’ “last resort, to protect themselves from tyranny in government.” – i.e., revolution.…
To me, having the right of freedom of speech means that I can voice my opinion wherever and whenever I feel the urge to without the fear of being prosecuted. The United States would be in an extremely weak state if citizens did not have the right to freedom of speech. Without freedom of speech in our Bill of Rights, people could not necessarily stand up for what they believed in. I think that if a person has a valid point or even an unvalid point that they want to voice nothing should stand in their path. It would be nearly impossible for certain organizations to form if the United States was without freedom of speech. Freedom of speech means to me that these certain radical organizations should be and are allowed to voice their opinions and…
Corporations are not Human Corporations should not have the right to free speech. The people who own them and the people who work for them already have those rights. If corporations had the right to free speech, the instances of libel and slander would probably increase greatly. Allowing corporations the right to say or publish anything they want would be socially irresponsible.…
In 1996 at Bonneville High school in Ogden, Utah a young foreign exchange student from Poland sat with her friend eating lunch. As she gazed upward she could see into the window of one of the history classes. To her horror, visible to the entire student body was displayed a Nazi flag. The flag was being displayed as part of a class on World War II and was displayed next to a Japanese flag, newspaper clippings, and other memorabilia to highlight certain aspects of that time period. After asking for the flag to be removed without avail, the student, Marta Daszkiewicz, wrote a letter to the local newspapers editorial section. In which she wrote “The swastika still evoked fears because the neo-Nazi movement is still alive in Germany. If you have Polish license plates, you can get beat up by neo-Nazis when you go into Germany," (Daszkiewicz, personal communication, February 15, 2012)…
I am not the most patriotic person, but I love America and there are multiple Americans older, more mature and more wise than I am who take their time in appreciating and supporting America and the people who fight for our freedom. The people who support our troops overseas are of course gonna support them when they come home and not leave them homeless or without healthcare; that would be absurd. Not only are they going to bolster and salute the white male soldiers, they are going to do the same for women soldiers, gay soldiers, black soldiers, and other ethnicities other than caucasian because discrimination doesn’t exist in America only freedom does. However, there are many hypocrites such as the NFL players who are disrespecting our troops…
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding 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. The article, “Protecting Freedom of Expression on The Campus,” by Derek Bok opens with a life changing scenario and information regarding the freedom of speech for those on the Harvard campus. Bok’s article voices his opinion about the First Amendment and should it make it okay to act upon racist acts, such as those that occurred on Harvard’s campus. As Bok stated in his essay, “two students hung Confederate flags in public view, upsetting students who equate the Confederacy with slavery. A third student tried to protest the flags by displaying a swastika” (Bok 172). This incident brought about many discussions and disagreements among many people on and off the campus. Bok writes a very sufficient and informative article by using pathos, ethos, and logos frequently.…
Do Americans take the First Amendment for granted, or use it, as a clutch to say what they feel is appropriate. The First Amendment 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 of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. (Siegel 3)…
Free political speech, the first amendment permits freedom of speech/expression, but does not protect citizens from sedition. Protected by the 14th Amendment, of due process that no state shall deny, the first amendment applies to both national and state government. It also allows state and national government to veto any form of speech that can influence a threat to the public or the government.…
The First Amendment does not permit the distribution of pamphlets that seeks to obstruct the lawful draft (Walker 2013, 200). This was not speech offering one’s opinion, but an unlawful act of obstructing the preparations of military action of our country (Walker 2013, 200).…
As a matter of constitutional tradition, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we presume that governmental regulation of the content of speech is more likely to interfere with the free exchange of ideas than to encourage it. The interest in encouraging freedom of expression in a democratic society outweighs any theoretical but unproven benefit of censorship. ("Supreme")…
Freedom of speech is one of the fundamental rights enshrined in the constitutions of all the democratic countries of the world. It is considered the most important article and right in the modern state, as it lies down the foundation of free, vibrant and democratic society. However, in the recent events this precious right has been violated by both the media and the general public, they can do whatever they want. In other words, media and general public misuse and misinterpret freedom of speech; therefore, there should be some limitations on freedom of speech.…
Freedom of speech refers to the right of the individual to express his views about matters of interest to him or her. I personally cannot picture a world where we are not allowed or entitled to voice our opinions freely over a matter which we see as important. I see no purpose then of having a mouth and voice if we are unable to speak and express our feelings.…
Our first amendment right has been one of the most controversial debates in the US for as long as I can remember. Many people have questioned whether our right to Freedom of Speech should be limited in some form while others believe there should be no limits. It is undeniable that this debate will constantly be revisited in the future as it is now in our present. The questions we must ask ourselves are, when is Freedom of Speech helpful and when is it harmful to society. I’m sure that the majority of debates regarding Freedom of Speech lean towards the positive and negative effects of that given right.…