How Political Correctness is an Attack on the 1st Amendment members of particular groups. in society. » Political correctness is idealistic at best, but the problems with these ideas come from those who use it to censor others. If our representatives are forced to self-censor to make sure they don't offend any group of people, that's not good for our freedom of speech, but people choose whether they want to use politically correct language. But the problem arises when people are forced to express themselves in a way that does not represent their true beliefs, for fear of risking their electability, credibility, and future opportunities to express their opinion. Say no to plagiarism. Get a Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The current culture around the politically correct (PC) movement is predatory, with people pushing for this language using their perceived outrage to stifle the argument. of those with whom they disagree. It is a failure of the First Amendment if we allow our language to be moderated by those who seek only to advance their own political agenda. The problem is obvious; the university can control who speaks, where they can speak on campus, and whether they can speak. Many universities with these rules are quite liberal, making it extremely difficult for conservative speakers to be admitted to these campuses. Extremist members of the PC movement call for legal regulation of languages that cause distress to a person or group of people. One author believes that enacting laws to limit our freedom of speech is a concerning proposition, but a law is unlikely to be put in place as it goes against the constitution. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law…restricting the freedom of speech.” But the enforcement of political correctness does not come from the law, but rather from the rules and regulations in areas that support the concept of political correctness. Many workplaces, universities, and private organizations use a "speech code," which is a regulatory rule that limits, restricts, or prohibits speech beyond the legal limits of free speech. Speech codes may be well-intentioned, but the First Amendment already has its limits that protect the legal rights of others against hate speech, actual threats, incitement, and other extreme speech. Speech codes aim to limit an individual's freedom of expression and the vague terms of the rules are concerning because, depending on their application, they could give rise to abuse. Many of these policies prohibit offensive speech and/or derogatory remarks. These speech codes can and have been abused to limit many protests/demonstrations to free speech zones or off campus. Many of these protesters must first request permission to demonstrate on campus, which may be granted or denied at the discretion of the University. The FIRE Foundation, or Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, states: If universities enforced these rules strictly, the leading voices of public criticism, satire and commentary would be silenced on American campuses, and some of our greatest authors, artists and filmmakers would be silenced. would be prohibited. These codes bring.

Essay / How Political Correctness is an Attack on the 1st Amendment members of particular groups. in society. » Political correctness is idealistic at best, but the problems with these ideas come from those who use it to censor others. If our representatives are forced to self-censor to make sure they don't offend any group of people, that's not good for our freedom of speech, but people choose whether they want to use politically correct language. But the problem arises when people are forced to express themselves in a way that does not represent their true beliefs, for fear of risking their electability, credibility, and future opportunities to express their opinion. Say no to plagiarism. Get a Custom Essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay The current culture around the politically correct (PC) movement is predatory, with people pushing for this language using their perceived outrage to stifle the argument. of those with whom they disagree. It is a failure of the First Amendment if we allow our language to be moderated by those who seek only to advance their own political agenda. The problem is obvious; the university can control who speaks, where they can speak on campus, and whether they can speak. Many universities with these rules are quite liberal, making it extremely difficult for conservative speakers to be admitted to these campuses. Extremist members of the PC movement call for legal regulation of languages that cause distress to a person or group of people. One author believes that enacting laws to limit our freedom of speech is a concerning proposition, but a law is unlikely to be put in place as it goes against the constitution. The First Amendment states that “Congress shall make no law…restricting the freedom of speech.” But the enforcement of political correctness does not come from the law, but rather from the rules and regulations in areas that support the concept of political correctness. Many workplaces, universities, and private organizations use a "speech code," which is a regulatory rule that limits, restricts, or prohibits speech beyond the legal limits of free speech. Speech codes may be well-intentioned, but the First Amendment already has its limits that protect the legal rights of others against hate speech, actual threats, incitement, and other extreme speech. Speech codes aim to limit an individual's freedom of expression and the vague terms of the rules are concerning because, depending on their application, they could give rise to abuse. Many of these policies prohibit offensive speech and/or derogatory remarks. These speech codes can and have been abused to limit many protests/demonstrations to free speech zones or off campus. Many of these protesters must first request permission to demonstrate on campus, which may be granted or denied at the discretion of the University. The FIRE Foundation, or Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, states: If universities enforced these rules strictly, the leading voices of public criticism, satire and commentary would be silenced on American campuses, and some of our greatest authors, artists and filmmakers would be silenced. would be prohibited. These codes bring.

Navigation

« Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Get In Touch