Pros And Cons Of Fighting Words Essay

677 Words3 Pages
Question: Should Fighting words based on races Based On Races Be Proscribed? When it comes to relationship, stinginess is a mere hurdle. Being stingy in accepting others who are different from oneself paralyzes the relationship. Fighting words based on races is one form of the stinginess in that such utterance demonstrates disregards of racial diversity. Concerned with both primary and secondary effects resulting from fighting words based on races, many people insist in proscribing such words. However, my stands is fighting words based on races should not be proscribed due to mainly two reasons. The first reason for holding such stands is because we have not reached any consensus on the definition of fighting words. To what extent do negative…show more content…
According to the First Amendment, everyone has rights to speak freely. Therefore, government should not be able to prohibit such instrinsic rights. In addition, freedom of speech is one form of exposition of ideas. Therefore, defending free speech equals excluding ideas, allowing all other ideas to be challenged. Free speech may upset or offend people, while the same speech may also embrace or console others. This is a nature of free speech. Therefore, prohibiting one’s rights of free speech or the free speech itself is an inappropriate extension of power for the government. People on the other side may refute with a need to protect community interests or prevent secondary effects caused by the fighting words. Nevertheless, consideration that must precede is not the potential harm toward community, but the very rights of individuals. In terms of racial issues, freedom of speech should be protected even in its entirety. Among the numerous reasons why human rights exist, one is to protect the minority against the whims of the majority. Therefore, the rights of free speech for the ones being offended racially, should be guaranteed and protected fully. Whether the individual speech is unprotected ‘fighting words’ or protected ‘free speech’ should not be determined by the government, the third party, but the parties
Show More
Related

  • Kimmel's Essay 'We Are All Confident Idiots'

    1215 Words  | 5 Pages

    think they know the most are actually the ones who know the least of all. Most people know, or once knew, of someone who was so arrogant in his or her apparent knowledge about a certain subject. David Dunning addresses this way of thinking in his essay “We Are All Confident Idiots,” in order to expose and educate others on how to be a well educated member of society. The author argues in favor of the Dunning- Kruger effect in order to convince his readers of a phenomenon that reveals how the incompetent

    Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Fighting Words Essay

Open Document