I believe that they should remain restrictive because less restrictive drug laws are not the solution to our drug problem, and instead, less restrictive laws are an extremely dangerous idea. This essay will investigate the multitude of reasons as
Solomon 1 Angela Solomon Jane Riches Digital Citizenship 31 Oct 2012 Should Hate Speech Be Blocked or Censored? Should hate speech articles be blocked from viewing? “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter. (George Washington - Brainy Quotes).” I think hate speech should only be blocked if it causes physical harm to a single person or an ethnic or religious group. Just because a person takes offense to something that someone said online and in the public, doesn’t mean the person who wrote it shouldn’t have the ability to say it.
Do you feel that smokers should be allowed to smoke anywhere? Why or why not? I feel like smokers should not be allowed to smoke just anywhere. There needs to be designated areas in when non-smokers can avoid the exposure of smoke. Why put other people in danger when they clearly are doing well by not smoking.
He continues by claiming that denying housing and employment for smokers is a form of public hostility. This is a false analogy, and where Scott uses the term “discrimination” in an inappropriate manner. Racial and ethnic discrimination is different because people do not choose to be a certain race like choosing to be a smoker. Furthermore, people do not negatively affect others in their vicinity with secondhand ethnicity. By stating that nonsmokers “force their beliefs on the rest of society,” Scott suggests that smokers are victims of violences, and are threatened with restriction of the First Amendment.
Although censorship is needed with issues concerning children, majority of censorship is a violation of our rights because what one person may find offensive and obscene does not necessarily represent that all citizens. The freedom to read is essential to the democratic way of life. But today, that freedom is under attack. The government is working to remove both books and periodicals from sale, to exclude certain books from public schools, to censor and silence magazines and newspapers, and to limit "controversial" books and periodicals to the general public. The overthrow of reading materials is defeat of creative thought.
The book Fahrenheit 451 is a book about censorship that bans book from the world. Anyone that has books gets burned down by the firemen. The government controls everything in the society and clearly it does not work. Therefore you can tell that if you censor books and do not allow people to read and gain knowledge a scenario like Fahrenheit 451 could happen faster then we
The fact that I was under the age of smoking during the incident brought me fears. The fear of simply displeasing the law, which is in this case the higher authority, led me to reject the cigarette offered by my friend. Simply said, I believe that my authoritian conscience basically overrides my humanistic conscience during the
It is safe to say that no amount of secondhand smoke is acceptable for a child to be around. We need to get more information out to the public and show the effects it has on not just their child but all children around. One inhale of side stream smoke can kill. Our government has banned smoking cigarettes in buildings such as restaurants so why not make a ban on smoking cigarettes in vehicles or around children
(PAGE 40) A danger with the 'harm to public order' argument is that states tend to interpret it very broadly and thus restrict many types of speech, including criticism of the government. Some argue pragmatically that anti-democratic ideas are best handled in a free democratic debate, and that people will eventually gain most from toleration of intolerant ideas. (PAGE 40) Public order and hatred between groups prohibition of hate speech agains members of ethnic, cultural, religious and other groups is often related to public order arguments too. Such expression can harm not (PAGE 43) only the victims themselves; the violence, threatening situations or the atmosphere of hatred that potentially result
2012. <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121745760276798609.html>. This website contains an article written by Jeremy Singer-Vine who claims the health benefits of Smoking Ban. Singer-Vine writes data of study which proves the benefits of banning smoking in public areas. Singer-Vine also writes about how it would actually benefit society by banning smoking but hurt the cigarette, tobacco and related industries