Bill of Rights, 1st Amendment and Internet Hate Speech
Hate Speech is an area in modern society that has taken on diverseaspects due to the changing standards of correct social behavior, and thelack of precise legislation dealing with this subject. Recently the mostdebated topic in this area has been the censorship of Hate speech on theInternet. This topic requires and is provoking serious discussion as theWorld Wide Web is as yet an unknown entity when it comes to censorship lawsand presents due to its intrinsic qualities of anonymity a challenge to law Regulating the Internet deals with such sensitive issues asinfringement of human and individual rights. I feel serious new issues havearisen from lack of legislation of the internet and amendment is necessaryto this state of affairs. Regulation of certain Internet material is neededto protect the values the Bill of Right and the First Amendment advocate. The American democracy is unique for the determination of itsforefathers to protect human rights at all levels of society. Theconstitution has had to go through many stages of development and amendmentbut on paper the trend has always been to protect all individuals and thecitizens of the United States from t
It is of concern to the United States as well butthe Internet still retains the protection of the First Amendment here. Cases in point are the recent events in Iraq and Afghanistan. (Glasser 1991, Gora 1991) At the same time individuals thatthreaten the very values that the First Amendments was made to protectcannot be allowed to use it for the propagation of destruction and hatebehind the protection of cyberspace; which is unregulated and anonymous butalso dangerously accessible to susceptible parties. The Bill of Rights was formulated in the late 1700's and designed sothat the powers of the national government were limited. Withthe use of the Internet inflammatory opinions and ideas can be proliferatedinternationally and to wide audiences with impunity. The Council ofEurope has adopted a measure that would criminalize Internet hate speech,including hyperlinks to pages that contain offensive content. (Scheeres2002) Specifically, the amendment bans "any written material, any image orany other representation of ideas or theories, which advocates, promotes orincites hatred, discrimination or violence, against any individual or groupof individuals, based on race, color, descent or national or ethnic origin,as well as religion if used as pretext for any of these factors. (Glasser, 1991)Originally consisting of ten amendments several have been added since then. (Woods 1999) Proposals are being put forward that includeencouraging Internet service providers (ISPs) to implement policiesprohibiting the posting of "material that intentionally incites violenceagainst an individual or group," and declaring it criminal to "knowingly orintentionally advocate on the Internet the commission of a crime ofphysical violence against a person or the property of any individual groupor class of individuals. (Scheeres 2002) Assistant US Attorney General for the Central District of CaliforniaMichael Gennaco said threats of violence are not protected by the FirstAmendment of the Constitution, simply because they are transmitted via theInternet. "(Woods 1999) Both are attempts to regulate the time place and manner of hate speechon a medium that guards anonymity and I feel these measures are extremelynecessary. Certainlimits and boundaries and limits need to be adhered to. This would be the only way to prevent the otherextreme of censorship and state autocracy. " guaranteeing that the government will not dictate nor interferewith matters of religion. Atthe same time should a web page encouraging young boys to resort toviolence to prove superiority of race be allowed to function unimpeded' Free speech rights been threatened in theoretically legitimate causessuch as times of national stress, war abroad or social upheaval at home.
Common topics in this essay:
Supreme Court,
Internet Woods,
Council Europe,
Nazis Gora,
Luther King,
Bill Rights,
Bill Amendment,
Amendment Constitution,
Hate Speech,
Amendment Congress,
hate speech,
glasser 1991,
gora 1991,
scheeres 2002,
freedom speech,
bill rights,
free speech,
supreme court,
speech seek address,
serge 1999,
1991 amendment,
seek address harm,
free speech rights,
glasser 1991 amendment,
|
Acceptance Essays
