Need help with assignments?
Our qualified writers can create original, plagiarism-free papers in any format you choose (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, etc.)
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Click Here To Order Now
The First Amendment
(Name)
(Instructors’ name)
(Course)
(Date)
The First Amendment
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”(Kilman and Costello 1)
The first amendment to the US constitution guarantees various rights including the right to freedom of religion, and the right of freedom of expression (Cohen H 1). Perceptibly, the first amendment withdraws all legislative power, whether state or federal, from limiting the free exercise of religion and other forms of expression. In view of that, the first amendment has been the center of many debates along academic circles as it pledges for the protection of some of the most controversial rights. Most critics believe that its provisions can easily be manipulated for the protection of harmful practices that may infringe on other human rights. Supporters of this bill of rights, on the other hand argue that it reduces the level of government involvement in public affairs. However, the provisions in the first amendment have been the foundation for policy making in the United States for many years, and for that reason are critical components of the US constitution.
This paper presents an evaluation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The paper examines its historical background and explains the implications of each of the provisions in the first amendment. The paper also provides some of the ethical concerns related to the first amendment, and provides recommendation on the same.
Historical Background
With regards to the legal sanction of the law into the US Constitutions, the first amendment dates back to the 25th of September, 1789. Though it was officially mandated 26 months later, the need for the first amendment was way overdue, owing to some of the US government practices at the time (Government Printing Office 1). Current literature on the first amendment explains that this bill of rights was aimed at eliminating arbitrary punishment that given for crimes related to seditious libel. Observably, the constitution at this time was not keen towards criticism of the government, and for that reason, a number of people and institutions suffered for this (Cohen C 257-65.). The existing political rivalries, that is, the federalist and the anti-federalists, were constantly in a tug-of-war regarding what was acceptable with reference to sentiments aimed at the government. Whereas the federalists did not condone government criticism, terming most comments as ‘scandalous’ and ‘malicious’, anti-federalists were in full support of such expression, hence the fall out between the two groups (Kilman and Costello 1). Accordingly, the first amendment was proposed as a solution to these constant fall outs between the federalists and the anti-federalists.
The US government consisted of mostly federalists, and for that reason, a number of individuals and groups were convicted before the endorsement of the first amendment into the US constitution. However, because crimes related to seditious libel did not cease to occur, the US government established the need for a solution to this before matters could get out of hand. The more people were prosecuted for such crimes, the more unruly the society became. The seditious libel offence gradually became a civil matter and was soon recognized as a civil affair, as opposed to, a criminal affair. Accordingly, the implementation of the first amendment granted utmost protection for the freedom of political speech, which was the basis for this bill of rights.
Analysis
As previously mentioned, the first amendment consists of two main components including the right to freedom of religion, and the right to freedom of expression. The former is further divided into two clauses including the establishment clause and the free exercise clause. The latter, carries the larger number of aspects including the right to freedom of speech, right to freedom of press, freedom of assembly and association, as well as, the rights to petition the government for the resolution of grievances (Kilman and Costello 1). Each provision in the first amendment serves to protect the rights to freedom of Americans on a different degree from the other.
Right to Freedom of Religion
The right to freedom of religion grants the freedom for establishment and exercise of religion by Americans and prohibits any interference by the government. With regards to the establishment clause, the US government is prohibited from passing legislation towards the establishment of one official religion (Government Printing Office 1).. Put simply, the US government is not allowed to favor or discriminate against any religions that its people choose to engage in. this clause emphasizes the need for the separation of the church from the state, and prohibits any constitutional declaration based on religion. The second clause, also referred to as the free exercise clause, supports the free exercise of religion by Americans. The key intent of this clause is to secure and encourage religious liberty of individuals by prohibiting any incursion by the law or legal institutions. This clause is guided by the notion of the freedom of conscience, and the government is prohibited from penalizing and discriminating individuals on the basis of their religious views.
Right to Freedom of Expression
The most crucial component of the right to freedom of expression is the freedom of speech. This clause supports that each individual express themselves freely with no interference from the government. In this clause, the right to free speech is recognized both as the action and as the medium through which communication is executed. Accordingly, if the government interferes with such freedom, it is expected to present substantial justification for this, hence allowing it to regulate the information passed in speech (Government Printing Office 1).. The right to freedom of press is the second provision under the freedom of expression and is often misunderstood to have a similar connotation to the right of freedom of speech. Basically, this clause allows individuals to express themselves through any form of publication in the press. However, it does not afford media workers any form of special rights that other citizens have not been granted thus reducing the probability of improper implementation (Cohen C 257-65.).
The right to assemble is also an added provision on the freedom of expression and it allows individuals to gather for legal and peaceful purposes. This clause also implies the right of association and belief but does not consider the right of freedom of social association. Put simply, this means that, the first amendment allows the government to prohibit people from associating in groups that are illegal and dangerous (Government Printing Office 1).. However, the government is prohibited from interfering with people’s rights to hold beliefs that belong to particular associations and groups. Lastly, the right to petition warrants people the right to seek help from the government to provide relief for an offence committed through the courts, as well as, any other government action. This is closely linked with the right of assembly as it allows individuals to work together towards a common good, more specifically a change in the government.
Ethical Concerns
Ethical issues associated with the first amendment regard the interpretation of this bill of rights, as well as, the execution of the same. This is mainly because it grants people free exercise of religion and expression, which in practice may bring about controversies (Tompkins 1). For example, issues related to religion are very complex, and so are the practices protected by the umbrella of religion. As religious analysts would explain, religion constitutes of beliefs and practices, and when it comes to identifying which practices are legal and illegal according to religion, a dilemma may arise. The free establishment and exercise of religion implies that whatever is classified as a religious belief or act is protected by the law, and for that reason, practices such as human sacrifices may be protected under this bill.
In addition to this, the first amendment exempts issues such as defamation, obscenity, and incitement with regards to the freedom of expression, and more specifically, the freedom of speech (Cohen C 257-65.). This, in turn, causes an ethical dilemma as to what may be considered as appropriate for free speech. Conclusively, the first amendment also poses an ethical dilemma when considering the issue of privacy. As per Supreme Court Justices’ acknowledgment, privacy is recognized as one of the constitutional rights that Americans are entitled to. However, because the first amendment guarantees political freedom, it does not recognize the level to which this freedom can infringe on personal privacy (Tompkins 1). Put simply, political freedom is seen as a threat to personal privacy, something that the first amendment does not fully recognize. By refusing to recognize this, the first amendment, therefore provides a leeway for the infringement of personal privacy in the name of political freedom.
Conclusion and Recommendation
The logic of the first amendment is comprehensible, as it seeks to protect individuals from government interference with their right to expression and religion. However, the first amendment lacks in providing a proper guideline for easy interpretation of this bill, and for that reason, does not fully live up to the reasons for its implementation. This is specifically because the first amendment can easily be translated to favor an individual who commits a crime under the pretence of right to religion and expression. Accordingly, there is need for the courts to re-evaluate the provisions in the first amendment so as to ensure that it is “appropriately” executed without violation. Accordingly, the first amendment should be revised, and upon this revision, should consider the “harm” principle when sanctioning this bill of rights. The revised first amendment should, therefore, consider the dangers of granting the freedom of religion and expression, thus give proper guidelines on what is moral and what is immoral. Nevertheless, the first amendment should be upheld as it constitutes a large portion of the policies that govern the United States of America. Without this, the US would be experiencing similar levels of chaos as those experienced during the revolution. This would, in turn, serve as the destruction of the American society as we know it today.
Works Cited
Cohen Carl. Free Speech and Political Extremism: How Nasty Are We Free to Be? Belmont,
California: Wadsworth Publishing, 1992. pp.
Cohen Henry. Freedom of Speech and Press: Exceptions in the First Amendment. Congressional
Research Service. 16 Oct, 2009. Web. 11 April, 2012. < http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/95-815.pdf>
“First Amendment: An Overview”. Cornell University Law School. 19 August, 2010. Web. 11
April, 2012.
“First Amendment: Religion and Expression”. Government Printing Office. 2 Oct. 1992. Web. 11
April, 2012.
Kilman, J. & Costello, G. The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and
Interpretation. Government Printing Office, 2000.
Tompkins, Paula. Exploring the Tension between the First Amendment and Ethics in the case of
“outing”. The electronic Journal of Communication. 1997. Web. 11 April, 2012. < http://www.cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/007/1/00711.HTML>
Need help with assignments?
Our qualified writers can create original, plagiarism-free papers in any format you choose (APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, etc.)
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Click Here To Order Now
Share this:
FacebookX
