"First Amendment Rights allow us to do simple things that keep this country in check. But recently, there have been court cases on people who are affected by laws that were wrote many years ago. Over the years, the government has changed, the people have changed, and even the country. Along with that, obviously laws have too. In order to keep up with developing technology, our laws might have to bend a little.
To what extent in the U.S. does the government–federal, state, and local–have the duty to monitor internet content? This is a question that many U.S citizens don't know the answer to. Everyday, people around the country search up anything they want without censorship. If you were warned that the government can see everything you search, would you browse what you usually do ever again?
The government sees what you do on the internet, but what if, that’s not all. They have the access to see your day-to-day life. They can track you, they can see your posts, and they can see what you have done through the course of your life. When is all this taking their privilege too far? They are on the verge of violating freedom of speech. Expressing in any way, your beliefs and perspective, just can’t be done anymore. Many
…show more content…
NSA. This is about AT&T clients who were unknowingly being tracked by the NSA. Thanks to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, there is a lot of evidence pointing that the NSA is guilty. Although, they are not the only ones who were supervising internet behaviors of people, big individuals have also been found culpable. Due to this case, others have been warned not to do illegal things because someone will be tracking it, and also it shows that you should not be the one tracking in this first place either. The moral of this situation is to make sure your actions are not considered illegal, because it is likely you will be caught in the crossfires of this controversial
A very popular constitutional issue in America is the First Amendment. The First Amendment is meant to protect, but in today’s society it is being questioned that the argument is being overly used. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression from government interference (Esmaili). Freedom of religion created the separation of church and state. It prohibits the government from interfering with a person's practice of their religion. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation. The right of freedom of expression gives the right to assemble and gather for peaceful and lawful purposes. It was adopted into the Bill of Rights in 1791. The Court later interpreted the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the rights in the First Amendment from interference by state governments. Putting this is layman’s term, you can pretty much say what you want without being penalized.
The internet is a vital part of our lives, but what if I said it was a completely public one? Privacy is a rare commodity in today's world. As Nicholas Carr writes about in his essay “Tracking Is an Assault on Liberty,” corporations pay close attention to citizens. The most frightening part is that this practice is perfectly legal. Even recently the government stripped more of our privacy away. In the beginning of April 2017, President Trump repealed regulations by the Federal Communications Commission that would have forced internet service providers to gain consent before selling data collected from their customers. However, corporations aren't the only ones capturing data from internet users. The government is also making use of these records.
When talking about the First Amendment, the law protects us from freedom of speech and free exercise of religion and it also stops Congress from making any new law to prohibit free speech and free exercise. The case involving a Christian printer who refused to print gay pride T-shirts. The printer declined the printing job for T-shirts promoting a gay pride festival on religious grounds, but he did offer the customer to help them find other local printers to do the work for the same price. Based on the information that was provided the printer had a history of rejecting other orders for shirts promoting sexually explicit material/actions and violence.
The First Amendment guarantees the right of free speech, but there are many other forms of the first amendment. The most common, is pure speech, which is the use of the spoken word to transport a particular idea. Another form is symbolic speech that refers to the use of symbolic objects or action to express an idea. Some examples of symbolic speech might be waving a flag or burning a cross. The First Amendment protects almost of forms of pure speech and symbolic speech. The First Amendment protects some of symbolic meaning, but not all. Congress argued that burning the American flag was of symbolic meaning to express political views
There were ten amendments added to the Constitution that provide citizens with unalienable rights, such as the right to bear arms, remain silent so as not to incriminate oneself in court, to defend against search and seizure, among several others. This paper will focus on the First Amendment:
The Second Amendment to the U.S Constitution is fiercely debated and interpreted differently among American citizens and argued with between the Legislative and Judicial branches of our government. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,” (Brooks). Because of the Second Amendment, citizens have the right to possess firearms and use them for protection. When researching the origin of the Second Amendment, its modern applications, and its relevance in today’s society, one can determine the Second Amendment’s current implications on today’s society.
Since the beginning of America’s history, there have been Amendments that protect the rights of its citizens. Whether that be from other countries, other people, or the government, these Amendments have helped America grow, and stay secure. However, it can be argued that one Amendment stands out more than the rest. The First Amendment has helped defend the rights of American citizens the most throughout the course of history.
The First Amendment was created in a way, to ensure that all those who seek freedom, in speech, press, religion, and assembling can do so. However, recently freedom of religion has not been fully secured. For instance, there has been bans against immigrants sorely because of their religion stereotype. Something that is contradictory to the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...". The First Amendment should be able to encourage each and every religious freedom, because people no longer feel safe about expressing their religion as the United States government have shown favoritism towards other certain religions. And since numbers are rising in certain religions, diversity should be accepted and shown throughout the U.S. and by the government.
Your blog brought up many interesting points. It seems as though you are supporting the making of an amendment to counter the 2nd amendment in the Constitution. You stated that times have changed and you are absolutely right. There are not wild animals living on the streets nor are there state militias like there were in the 1700's. However, you also talked about the conservative view that many ignorant Republicans hold. I suggest that you check out this link http://heedinggodscall.org/content/pfctoolkit-10 as it has some astonishing numbers on injury or death related incidents due to firearms. Now check out this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate. As you can see, countries with little
The adoption of the Constitution depended on ratification, or approval, by 9 of the 13 states.
The First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise there of; 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.” Christianity is one of the oldest and most popular religions of the United States. This makes it very easy for Christians to be ridiculed. The First Amendment is allegedly ensured to every American, but Christians have to fight to keep their First Amendment Rights.
The 2nd amendment of the U.S. Constitutions protects the rights of people to bear arms, such as assault rifles. Are guns to blame? Gun control isn’t the answer. It’s whoever is behind the trigger. I do believe that the United States needs better mental health reforms to help those in need that way no more mass shootings happen. Have you heard or seen the phrase “guns don’t kill people, people do”? As Americans our rights are established on the constitution and the amendments. The 2nd amendment has been a debate since Obama’s administration. After so many mass shootings, it still comes down to, whos fault is it?
The Second Amendment states: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Even though this amendment has been around for hundreds of years, people still argue over what it means and if it should still apply today. The two extreme sides of this argument as stated in Henry Winkler’s book are the Gun Nuts and the Gun Grabbers (Winkler 15,45). One side argues that there should not be any guns at all, and the other side argues that everyone should have a gun. This discussion has been around for decades, and I believe that it is not going away anytime soon. There are a few arguments as to why I believe that the government shall not and cannot remove guns from American citizens. First, I believe that I have a constitutional right to own firearms due to the second amendment. Secondly, everyone should not be punished for the actions of a few lawless individuals. Thirdly, the removal of firearms would be costly, hard to enforce and unlikely to succeed, and finally, gun control laws are racially motivated. Through the use of what I believe combined with historical examples, my goal is to persuade a “Gun Grabber” on why the government cannot take away my guns.
The U.S. Government has turned the Internet into something it was never intended to be: a system for spying on us in our most private moments. Out of control government
I believe that the extend of the U.S. government monitoring the internet content is very high and they they monitor an immense amount of the internet if not all. If their were to be something that that government didn't want our society to see then they would shut it don't. For example if the government did not want this essay that I am typing right not to be shown to the internet web, than it will not be show for sure. So in conclusion I believe that our government secretly regulates what we do and do not see making our society to believe what they want us to believe and that they are monitoring what is being done, said, or shown to the public. They are right under our noses but our society may not always see that because we are blinded by our own