Is the First Amendment more important.........
When, if ever, is it justified for the government to suspend an individual’s civil liberties and safety for national security purposes? Shouldn't free speech rights allow individuals to speak out against the government?
59 comments:
The government is allowed to suspend an individual's civil liberties and safety for national security purposes if the individual is giving out information that may hurt the United States and put the United States citizens in danger. Also, if the person is saying something and actually doing something that will hurt someone.
It is only justified for the government to suspend an individual's right and safety for national security purposes when the individual is distributing information that could obviously hurt the U.S. and poses an immediate threat. Free speech should allow individuals to speak out against the government for the most part, but if a threat is posed to the government then it makes sense that free speech would be restricted. When a threat is posed, then free speech should be limited because if the government was attacked, our rights would dematerialize.
I think that sometimes free speech could be suspended if it hurts the nation. One example is if the person in question had information that if released threatens lives. Another example is if the USA had to appear to be united. If a war had just started, USA vs. Mexico, and if a person from the USA had information that says that the USA was about to lose the war, people would panic. It would break the nation when the nation had to appear unified.
Free speech is a freedom American citizens are incredibly lucky to have, however, when an individual abuses the freedom, and says something that could cause danger, the freedom can no longer protect him or her. Free speech allows people to speak out against the government, but once their words have the capability to cause harm, it becomes illegal.
I believe that the government should not be able to suspend an individuals rights. The only time the government should be able to suspend rights is when it is a matter of national security. Such as, giving away the positions of US soldiers.
The government is allowed to suspend someone's rights if that person is using their rights to deliberately hurt another or even the national security. People do have rights, but there are limitations to these. As many movies quote "With great power comes great responsibility". Although some people see this as a cheesy line, it is actually true in real life (even though we don't have the power to fly... ). :)
The government should never take away peoples rights stated in the Bill of Rights. I believe that the government can suspend an individual's civil liberties of free speech if it is a threat to the country and could potentially put the United States in danger. For example, a citizen could post on an online blog their opinions on the government, its only when people act on it and hurt the country that it is not protected by the constitution.
The only reasonable time for the government to suspend and individuals right and safety for national security purposes is when that person would be doing something that could possibly hurt or do anything negative to our country. Free speech does allow people of our country to speak what they wish but if they are saying anything threatening or derogatory about our nation and our government then that is a different story.
It is only justified for the government to suspend and individuals rights and safety for national security purposes when the individual is giving out essential information that could hurt the government or disrupting the flow of the national government than their could be occasions when the government could take away a humans rights only if it poses a huge threat to the U.S. and is in danger of putting other citizens in danger. Free speech right should allow citizens to speak their mind and say what they want about the government and speak their opinion because that is what freedom is all about. Once people expand those boundaries and put the U.S. or a portion of people in risk than the government should have the authority to abolish that individuals rights.
The government is allowed to limit an individual's rights and safety when the person is jeopardizing National Security. Freedom of speech is allowed if the individual is ONLY expressing their ideas and concepts, not to distribute information concerning, such as, positions of the U.S. army.
The only time where the government could take away an individuals liberties is when they are trying to go against the government and hurting it in a major way. Free speech does allow people to say what they want butthere are limitations to that. If you try to threaten or hurt the government in a big way then that automatically lets the right to freely speech cancel out.
No. It should be legal to have a limit on free speech stating that it can't affect national security. This is necessary because there are many ways people could leak army tactics and endanger our troops. This is a necessary restriction and you should not be allowed to oppose it no matter what.
The government should have the right to suspend civil liberties only under certain circumstances. When it puts America or any other individual in danger, only then should the government restrict civil rights. If these usages of rights create an "iminent lawless action", then they should be restricted.
It is justified for the government to suspend and individual's civil liberties for national security purposes. Free speech does dive the right to express you opinions but there are restrictions for a reason. For example killing someone could be and expression of you anger but it is still illegal for obvious reasons. Speaking out against the government is fine unless you are saying anything that might harm the United Sate.
I believe the government is allowed to suspend an single individual's right for the safety of our national security. This should not allows be the case because that means that you are limiting a 1st Amendment Right. In a case of a threat to national security there should allows be a different standard of free speech. People should not be able the say something that hurts the reputation of a government official.
I feel that the only time the government can take the right of free speech away is only if someone is hurt or could be. I also think that individuals should be ably to speak against the government but only if it doesn't put the US in serious danger because of what someone or something said.
The government can suspend an individual's right only to protect the government and the citizens. People can if it does not lead to danger in any way. If they say something that can hurt the government and people, then it's not okay. If it's just and opinion, then it's fine. If it's something to destroy the government, then it's bad because people will get hurt. It all depends on what the person/people say.
I think that the government should be able to say that we the people can not talk bad about them. I think that it is bad for America if people can just say things to anybody that the government sucks. So i think that that should be one limitation to free speech.
The government is allowed to put li iterations on our free speech. But as we said in class we can still say stuff about the government but there may be consequences. The first amendment contains some of our most important rights but the government is the one who gave it to us and they should be allowed to put limits on it and tell is what we can and cannot do. I think that it is fair to say that you are not allowed to say Anything at would put someone in danger. Think of it this way if you were the person getting hurt you would want the law to apply to you. But if you were the person hurting someone you wouldn't want the rule to apply.
I agree with Schenck that the government should never be allowed to take away any citizens first amendment rights. The bill of rights is very important to this country and the government can not just start taking away the rights that help us live freely. Free Speech rights should allow individuals to speak out against the government and our free speech should protect us doing so.
The only time that the government is allowed to suspend ones first amendment rights, is when a person says something against the government or says something that puts one or more in danger. For example, if someone exposed a map of where our troops are going to be in the war, that is a threat to our national security. Therefore that is something that the government can take away your rights for. It is not right to say anything against the government because one you get in trouble, and two they will always win because they are ones that are in power.
I do not believe it is the privilege of the government to violate the rights they promised us at birth. it is unconstitutional to, under any circumstances, suspend an individual's civil liberties and safety, even for national security purposes. because if we're violating our defining document in order to keep it safe, what are we fighting for?
A person's civil liberties should not be allowed if they have an intention to harm the U.S. and its citizens. There are many people who want to harm the United States (like 911) for religious differences. They have a right to think that, but should not actually plan to go and bomb important buildings in the U.S.
If there is ever a case where an individual gets their civil liberties taken away it should be for a cause that benefits much more than a group of people. For example the draft benefits the defense of the United States of America. Also, one of the more important parts of the first amendment (free speech) should allow us to speak out against the government as long as it does not include telling a harmful foreign country about vital top secret information against our nation's security.
The government is allowed to suspend ab individual's civil liberties if he is giving out information that poses a threat to national security or to the US army. Also if the person is giving out false information that will hurt someone, the government should suspend his civil liberties. Free speech rights should allow individuals to speak out against the government, but if it endangers the United States citizens then you can suspend an individual’s civil liberties.
The freedoms that were written in the Bill of Rights should never be taken away by the US government. Maybe the government could take the rights away for certain quantities of time but never forever. I believe that there should be a certain time and place to allow people to speak out against the government instead of letting people walk around speaking as if the government should be something normal to gossip about. But the government should not be able to take away your freedom. No one should, unless you deserve it.
The only time it is justified for the government to suspend the right to free speech is when someone is a threat to National security or if there is imminent lawless action. other that during those times then the government shouldn't be allowed to limit free speech.
It is justified for the government to suspend an individual's civil liberties and safety when said individual is posing a substantial threat to the government or others' well being. If there is reason to believe that what the individual is saying is likely or even possibly going to hurt anyone, then the government is allowed to take away their freedom of speech.
In the bill of rights it is stated that the government should never take away peoples rights. However, if the rights could potentially hurt the country, or harm other people it is not protected by the constitution.
I believe that freedom of speech could be suspended if it invlolves hurting our nation. Freedom of speech is a very luckey right that the citizens of our nation have and we should not take advantage of it and abuse our nation in any way.
The government is certified to suspend an individual's civil liberties and safety for national security purposes if the individual is providing information that could possibly be a threat to our nation's civilization and states an immediate threat. The concept of Free Speech should permit people to express their feelings towards the government at any time and place. However, if a threat is posed to the United States government that threatens the safety and security of our country, then it is fairly reasonable that they would put limitations on free speech. Overall, people question the idea of free speech itself because if we are not capable to have the power of saying anything, where and when we desire to say it, then how do we know if we are truly free? In actuality, we can physically say what we feel, however, good or bad, anything you say has a consequence, and if it is a dangerous threat, then the obvious consequence would be bad.
I think that the government has the right to suspend the rights of people if the country is currently in a situation where it is on the brink o it's own destruction. I would rather have my free speech right suspended than have the country in which I live that gave me that right be destroyed
It is defiantly justified for the government to suspend an individuals civil liberties and safety for national security purposes. You should be allowed to speak out against the government, as long as their is no intent to hurt anyone. People should right, but if they miss use these rights the should be able so have them suspended. Especially if they are using them to hurt another person.
The government is allowed to suspend an individuals civil liberties and safety of national security purposes if the person is saying thing that could start a riot or if the person is giving away national defense secrets that could potentially hurt the US. I do think that free speech rights should be able to speak out against the government because i feel that it should be all or nothing. YOu should be able to use your free speech rights all the time or non at all.
I think that it is acceptable for the government to take away certain rights during war time to protect national security such as having the right to choose weather you want to fight or not. However free speech should never be taken away at any time because the limitations that we already have set in place will keep order in the way people speak so there is no need to take it away. People should be allowed to speak out against the government if they want to do so in a peaceful manor which has always been the case and should not change just because of national security.
The government is allowed to suspend and persons civil rights and the safety for the national. I believe that a person should be allowed to speak against the government and be able to speak without limitations. As long as the person does not follow up on there sayings the wont hurt anyone
I believe that freedom of speech does not allow you to speak out against your government because sometimes if you speak against the government it can hurt its reputation and can also lead to danger. Freedom of speech is the freedom to express yourself and to speak freely, but once what you say becomes dangerous and disturbing the government can put limitations to your rights.
The government should be allowed to suspend your first amendment rights to protect anything that would hurt the government.
The government has certain rights and abilities to do what they think is protecting the U.S citizens. Whether or not these "rights" are right is not for us to decide to a certain extent. The gov't is able to take away rights that may harm other people if you have them. The first amendment right is one that should always be protected.
i think that if what they are saying is putting the national security of our country at risk then they yes they should be suspended, but if they say something that makes the government look bad but thats all then no they shouldnt be suspended.
The government is allowed to suspend an individual's civil liberties and safety for nation security purposes when an individual is giving out information that could clearly harm the United States citizens. Free speech should allow citizens to speak out, even if it is against the government however there are restrictions. For example if it is going to harm the government then it becomes illegal.
I think they should be allowed to speak out the govt. but if what they spoke out wouldn’t be too threatening. If they told the people to start shooting up govt. officials and handed out guns, you have an issue. As long as they’re not going to put their words into action to harm others, it would be fine. And also if our govt. was attacked, the rights that the anti- govt. people used as their crutch, would be no more.
The government is allowed to suspend individual civil liberties for the safety of the United States and people around you. For example, during war time you are not allowed to give any information to the enemy. In addition, you are not allowed to say fire in a busy movie theater because it might start a panic and in-danger the people around you.
The decision of suspending an citizens guaranteed rights for the sake of the national security of our government is a tough decision. My personal opinion on the matter is that when these liberties pose a threat to the safety of the United States. Yet, their has to be a certain level of danger or enough evidence to prove so as well as the thought that these liberties cannot be permanently taken away. I don't think an opinion can pose a threat but if that opinion is acted on that is when there is a problem.
The government should be allowed to suspend the right of free speech only if when the person says it, it inflicts danger. This is important because if it doesn't inflict danger then, it doesn't matter what you say. By the government doing this, it helps and protects the American people.
The government can suspend an individual's civil liberties and safety for national security purposes when that individual is posing a threat against the national security. Free speech allows you to express your opinion without restraint, but free speech has a limitation, when you say something that puts others in danger.
The government is allowed to suspend an individuals right if it exposes National Security. Although you have the right to free speech and press it could danger our whole country if anything where to be "leaked." They are allowed to if it dangers us and our counrty. We have the right to do it, but there will be consequences for our actions.
I truly believe that the government should be able to take freedom of speech away if they believe that someone is getting hurt. The speaker should be able to say whatever he wants to say whether it be good or bad, but there might be consequences to the action being done.
I beliEve that the government can suspend the rights granted to the citizens by the Bill of Rights if the use of the free speech conflicts with the safety of the nation and those that reside in it. Free speech should protect those that speak out against the government but not if the words spoken affect the government in very bad ways. Revealing the position of American troops in a war is an example of when the right to free speech should be limited.
I believe that it is okay for the government to take away free speech to a certain extent during a certain time. If we are at war and someone said posted on the internet our troop movements if don't believe that it is protected by free speech.
The government is allowed to suspend and individual's civil liberties because if that person were to ever hurt someone in a way that would possibly attack the U.S then that persons liberties could be suspended.
The Government is allowed to suspends and individual's civil Liberties and safety for national security purposes if the individual is giving out info that could hurt the U.S. or putting the people in danger. If there is war going on or when a threat is created, Free Speech should have limits.
The government should be allowed to take away your first amendment rights for matters of national security. If you are giving out classified information about something like our home defense plans, then it might eventually get to someone who wants to hurt America, and that could end up putting thousands of people in danger.
Personally, I believe the government shouldn't have any right to suspend 1st amendment rights. The government, though it may seem more powerful than anything else, is really a body made of individuals. Individuals shouldn't have the power to take away such a basic right from other individuals because everyone is equal. What makes the individuals in government more important than the ones that make up the majority of the population of the US?
I think that the government should be allowed to suspend an individual's civil liberties and for national security purposes if one threatens to hurt or does hurt our country by releasing information that was supposed to be kept a secret, or by ones actions that may harm others.
Are country's government is allowed to take a way are individual's rights citizens. The government would have the right to do that if someone is saying something that is a threat to the national security or if someone is going to say something that in the end would hurt another person.
Yes, free speech rights should allow individuals to speak out against the government because the government could be hiding and trying to prevent certain items of information from getting out into the public. For example, if the people thought the government was trying to start a war with another country, and somehow the word got out about it, the people of the United States should be allowed to know if their country might be going to war.
Post a Comment