The Significance of Putting Limitation and Prohibition to The Expression of Personal Opinion

Freedom of speech must have limits and censorship because I feel for one’s thoughts to be taken into consideration it should be brought across in a passionate yet respectful manner. My definition of freedom of speech is being able to speak your mind and express your thoughts of what is going on in the world around you in a respectful manner. We all have the right to speak our opinions but we should also mindful on our choice of words regrading threats, religion beliefs, and expressing one’s opinion.

If a man was to go on the internet and make a video saying how he hates LBGYT and he is going to kill them, that comment isn’t permissible because at that point he is commenting a hate crime and the 1st amendment doesn’t protect hate crimes which can involve but is not limited to antigay, racism, or sexist. According to Encyclopedia Britannica article hate crimes such racist threats, antigay, and sexist insults are unprotected by the 1st amendment. As if he got on the internet and made a video saying that they world is turning into a gay community and that he doesn’t agree with the law of allowing gay marriages this is permissible because he is expressing his opinion on how he feels about it. There is a line that is drawn on what is tolerated and not tolerated; the line is drawn when it begins to offset the basic human rights and people’s rights of life.

We voice our thoughts not really knowing whether we have gone too far went over our limit. In the Supreme Court case Elonis v. United States; Elonis was convicted after making subjective threats on the internet saying things like “I’ve got enough explosives to take care of the state police and the sheriff's department” and “I’m checking out and making a name for myself Enough elementary schools in a ten-mile radius to initiate the most heinous school shooting ever imagined ... The only question is ... which one?” He fought with the government that the 1st amendment gave him the intent to the threat and that he didn’t mean it in a harmful way. Federal courts said that “true threats” can be interpreted in so many ways that it doesn’t mean that they aren’t threats; it just saying that threats are illegal period and harmful, no matter if it is being said that way or in a joking matter it is still taking serious.

Freedom of speech in America hasn’t been perfect you cannot yell dangerous things such as fire or anything that make the crowd panic. We can express our opinions but again there are limits that aren’t supposed to be crossed such as racist, violent, antigay, sexist etc. Some may say that isn’t constitutional but its constitutional to countervail people’s basic human rights or rights to life.