Our forefathers left the interpretation up to us. Through the years, these different interpretations have lead to many different forms of speech which are considered legal or illegal. Speech is defined as any act of communication between two or more people. Speech can either be given by words, actions, signs, or symbols. Ou

How can we have the freedom of speech if there are so many loopholes to be found within one clause, of one amendment? There are so many different situations in which you can look at the actions of one person and consider it a form of “free speech” or a form of defamation upon another person’s character or a harmful act upon another. When should we really draw the line? You may think that you the right to say or do what you think is appropriate to state your position, but when you least expect it you have crossed that line and you are subject to the consequences of your actions. Ignorance of the law does not save you from our legal system. Mark Twain said it best when he stated, “It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence to never practice either of them” (Miller, 173).

It is odd to see the fact that most courts give full protection of freedom of speech in most situations even when it involves “fighting words” or “hate speech.” A man’s case, in which he was charged for riding a horse through a gay rights rally and shouting antigay slogans, was thrown out of a Minnesota court. It was stated that “he cannot be prosecuted under a Minnesota “hate crime” statute because the statute violates the First Amendment. The court concluded that the statute sweeps too broadly because it also criminalizes protected ‘expressive activity’” (Miller, 164). But why is this not considered to be an offensive act toward another? The state of Minnesota considers this an act of expressing their personal beliefs and does not believe it has the right to infringe on this person’s activity. This man did indeed carry out offensive acts against others. He may have only been expressing his opinion, but his derogatory comments could have had drastic affects on the psyche of the people participating in the rally. He should have been subject to the penal code for these horrific actions.

The differing standards concerning what constitutes free speech need to be addressed. For instance, you can walk into the Art Smithsonian in Washington D.C. with your children and expect to have a good time but end up turning the corner and see a huge naked woman painted on the wall or sculpted into a 10 foot figure without any warning. These paintings should be censored and put into a section of the art museum with warnings around the entrances in order for people to not be subje

Some topics in this essay:
Supreme Court, Roland Carlton, Double Standards, Washington DC, Mark Twain, United Capital, free speech, considered offensive, freedom speech, Cases” Gigalaw, Northwester University, actions signs, words actions signs, double standards, words actions, Goodwin Jean, Publishing Company, infringe rights human, signs symbols, symbol considered, rights human, infringe rights, actions signs symbols, rights human considered, speech granted words,