Counter-Claim Argument Essay on Offensive Speech(Hate Speech and Bullying)
April 14, 2014
Prompt: Should offensive speech, like hate speech and bullying - online or in person - be restricted and prohibited?
“On October 17, 2006, Megan Meir, a thirteen-year-old girl in Dardenne Prairie, Missouri, who had been diagnosed with attention deficit disorder and depression, committed suicide because of postings on MySpace, an Internet social networking site, saying she was a bad person, whom everyone hated and the world would be better off without” (John O. Hayward). Throughout the years offensive speech, like hate speech and bullying--online or in person--has become such a controversy whether or not they should be restricted and prohibited. We Americans were given “an amendment to the United States Constitution guaranteeing the rights of free expression and action that are fundamental to democratic government. These rights include freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech” (dictionary.com). While these types of offensive acts go on, many violent actions have taken place such as riots, fights, etc. which spark up even more problems in our world today. Many say these types of hate speech and bullying should be prohibited because it causes hurt and pain to others and or one’s self, and we have others who believe limiting hate speech and bullying is going against their freedom of expression. Although some people believe the speech of cyber bullying and hate speech should not be prohibited because the act is taking away their freedom of speech rights, cyber bullying and hate speech, in fact, should be prohibited when the protection and the lives of people are at risk. Many people argue that limiting any sort of speech is interfering from a right they have, known as the First Amendment. Restricting hate speech and bullying quiets ones voice, making it contravene the right to freedom of speech if only that one voice is being heard. People do not want to have any restrictions from any type of speech
Prompt: Should offensive speech, like hate speech and bullying - online or in person - be restricted and prohibited?
“On October 17, 2006, Megan Meir, a thirteen-year-old girl in Dardenne Prairie, Missouri, who had been diagnosed with attention deficit disorder and depression, committed suicide because of postings on MySpace, an Internet social networking site, saying she was a bad person, whom everyone hated and the world would be better off without” (John O. Hayward). Throughout the years offensive speech, like hate speech and bullying--online or in person--has become such a controversy whether or not they should be restricted and prohibited. We Americans were given “an amendment to the United States Constitution guaranteeing the rights of free expression and action that are fundamental to democratic government. These rights include freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech” (dictionary.com). While these types of offensive acts go on, many violent actions have taken place such as riots, fights, etc. which spark up even more problems in our world today. Many say these types of hate speech and bullying should be prohibited because it causes hurt and pain to others and or one’s self, and we have others who believe limiting hate speech and bullying is going against their freedom of expression. Although some people believe the speech of cyber bullying and hate speech should not be prohibited because the act is taking away their freedom of speech rights, cyber bullying and hate speech, in fact, should be prohibited when the protection and the lives of people are at risk. Many people argue that limiting any sort of speech is interfering from a right they have, known as the First Amendment. Restricting hate speech and bullying quiets ones voice, making it contravene the right to freedom of speech if only that one voice is being heard. People do not want to have any restrictions from any type of speech
Cited: Eissens, Ronald. "Hate Speech on the Internet Should Be Regulated." Hate on the Net: Virtual Nursery for In Real Life Crime. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Network Against Cyber Hate (INACH), 2004. Rpt. in Civil Liberties. Ed. Roman Espejo. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Apr. 2014. "First Amendment" Dictionary.com. 3 Apr. 2014. <http://dictionary.reference.com/>. Web. Hayward, John O. "Anti-Cyberbullying Laws Are a Threat to Free Speech." Netiquette and Online Ethics. Ed. Noah Berlatsky. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "Anti-Cyber Bullying Statutes Threat to Student Free Speech." Selected Works of John O. Hayward. Vol. 3. 2010. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Apr. 2014. Starr, Sandy. "Hate Speech on the Internet Should Not Be Regulated." The Media Freedom Internet Cookbook. Vienna, Austria: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), 2004. Rpt. in Civil Liberties. Ed. Roman Espejo. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.