Newt Gingrich Against Freedom of Speech

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Ladies and gentlemen, my fellow classmates and fellow citizens at large, extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures. It is an awesome opportunity for me to talk about an issue as serious as the First Amendment in the greatest constitution of all time, the constitution of our country, the United States of America.

Our founding fathers made sacrifices and did us proud by bequeathing us a stable and sound constitution. Thomas Jefferson, in his contribution to the American peoples, ensured that there were various protection rights for the citizens, and one of the greatest that he ensured was enshrined in our constitution was the First Amendment which protected free speech and free religious exercise. (Tom Head)

According to the constitution, the First Amendment is part of the United States Bill of rights that was put in place due to the advocation of the anti-federalists who wanted the powers of the federal government to be minimized, and it 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.” (Tom Head)

The First Amendment, therefore, effectively protects the right to freedom of speech and religion, but there are exceptions to this, situations where the freedom of speech may be curtailed and include obscenity cases, child pornography, control of commercial speech, cases of copyright and property rights. It is against this background of the possibility of limiting freedom of speech that Newt bases his argument on, and the reason most relevant for his case is a restriction of speech for protection against possible violence against innocent people, ban on hate speech, and defamation. (Wikipedia).

All these generally contribute to terrorism or are tools used by terrorists. Newt is not interested in the limitation of freedom of speech for the sake of it but is only interested in its application against the terrorists. By the time the First Amendment was drafted, the terrorism cases were not as serious as they are currently, and that is why it is necessary to look at the matter more seriously. The main concern of this limitation on freedom of speech is how it will be implemented and the innocent people it will affect.

In the constitution, the government is allowed to control the content of free speech in some circumstances which are justifiable and for the good of the citizens. According to Justice Murphy, freedom of speech cannot be unlimited all the time in all situations; there are some kinds of speech which when punished, is not viewed as a violation of the provisions of the constitution, especially those which, when pronounced, result into injury and cause a violation of peace. (FindLaw). These are referred to as fighting words. Terrorist communication acts fall within this category. According to Newt, their use of words is just as effective in instilling fear and panic as using weapons; they still achieve their objectives and should not be protected by the constitution in this. (New Gingrich, 2006).

The only constant thing in life is change, everything changes, and we have a big problem of terrorism, and that is why I said and still insist that desperate situations call for desperate measures. If, by any chance, the limitation of freedom of speech may be used to help solve the problem of terrorism for the greater benefit of the American people and even other people in other countries, then why not make the sacrifice for the greater good of mankind? Thank you.

References

FindLaw. U.S. Constitution: First Amendment. Government Restraint of Content of Expression. Web.

Newt Gingrich.The 1st Amendment Is Not a Suicide Pact: Blocking the Speech That Calls for Our Death. 2006. Web.

Tom Head. About. . 2008. Web.

Wex. Cornell University School of Law. Legal Information Institute. First Amendment. Web.

Wikipedia. . Web.

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!