why Should people be able to protest at funerals due to the emotional Grievance state of their families?

The 1st amendment consists of freedom of assembly, better known as, peaceable assemblies. This means that the government must allow people to meet, protest, and march. People have the right to protest at funerals, because this is seen as freedom of speech. It doesn’t matter what is being said, they have a freedom of speech because it is listed in the first amendment. Protesting at funerals is legal. This was founded by Fred Phelps. An act called ‘Respect for America’s Fallen heroes Act’ was signed in 2006 by George W. Bush. This then prohibited protesters from trying to disrupt funerals. Although people may have the right to freedom of speech, the things that they say are not always necessarily appropriate. In spite of the fact that people can protest at funerals they must stay within 300 feet of the cemetery and the protesting should occur one hour before and one our after the funerals. When protesting at funerals their objective is to promote slander against the armed forces and their families with grievance and loss processes. Their signs have said “God Hate You” to “Thank God for Dead Soldiers” (ABC News, 2019). I don’t think this should be allowed, because it is disrespectful behavior to be a nuisance at someones final resting place. I believe that the families of these soldiers deserve consideration through the hard time of losing a son, brother, father, etc.

“Funeral Protests.” Mtsu.edu. N. p., 2019. Web. 29 Sept. 2019.

News, ABC. “Military Funeral Protests Outrage Families, Lawmakers.” ABC News. N. p., 2019. Web. 29 Sept. 2019.

” Funeral Protests | Freedom Forum Institute.” Freedomforuminstitute.org. N. p., 2019. Web. 29 Sept. 2019.

Burning the american flag

Burning The Flag

Should you be allowed to burn the flag? 

People can burn the flag for many different reasons. Some of the reasons can be protesting against the country, symbolically insulting someone, or protest against nationalism. Burning the flag to many people see it as disrespect to the people of our nation, our military and our government. Burning the flag is not illegal to do. There are laws that if you set a fire without a permit can give you a misdemeanor though. There was an incident where a man, Gregory Lee Johnson burned the flag in Dalla, Texas. He burned the flag in protest of the president, Ronald Reagan’s policies.  Johnson argued that what he did was protected by symbolic speech. Symbolic speech is protected by the first amendment. Johnson was sentenced 1 year in jail and a 2,000 dollar fine. Burning the flag should not be illegal because everyone has different beliefs in everything and everyone expresses themselves in different ways.

Works Cited

1. “Facts And Case Summary – Texas V. Johnson.” United States Courts. N. p., 2019. Web. 24 Sept. 2019.
2. Explore.proquest.com. N. p., 2019. Web. 24 Sept. 2019.
3. “Cons.” Flag burning. N. p., 2019. Web. 1 Oct. 2019.

Burning the american flag

Burning The Flag

Should you be allowed to burn the flag? 

People can burn the flag for many different reasons. Some of the reasons can be protesting against the country, symbolically insulting someone, or protest against nationalism. Burning the flag to many people see it as disrespect to the people of our nation, our military and our government. Burning the flag is not illegal to do. There are laws that if you set a fire without a permit can give you a misdemeanor though. There was an incident where a man, Gregory Lee Johnson burned the flag in Dalla, Texas. He burned the flag in protest of the president, Ronald Reagan’s policies.  Johnson argued that what he did was protected by symbolic speech. Symbolic speech is protected by the first amendment. Johnson was sentenced 1 year in jail and a 2,000 dollar fine. Burning the flag should not be illegal because everyone has different beliefs in everything and everyone expresses themselves in different ways. now , president Trump is all in for making an amendment for burning the flag. He says that he would put anyone in jail for burning the American flag. 

Works Cited

1. “Facts And Case Summary – Texas V. Johnson.” United States Courts. N. p., 2019. Web. 24 Sept. 2019.
2. Explore.proquest.com. N. p., 2019. Web. 24 Sept. 2019.
3. “Cons.” Flag burning. N. p., 2019. Web. 1 Oct. 2019.
4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/15/no-brainer-trump-tweets-support-amendment-banning-flag-burning/ 

Does the first amendment allow Public employees to express themselves however they want?

Freedom of speech from the first amendment states that everyone has the right to express themselves in our country. However, the speech of those in the public workplace has some limitations. According to a History article, The U.S. Supreme Court had made limitations to freedom of speech such as obscene material, plagiarism, defamation, and true threats. Due to the fact that these “limitations” are not defined very clearly, there are “gray areas” that may cause issues for public employees within our society when it comes to freedom of speech. 

It has been shown that workplace rights of employees have been decreasing in the past few decades. The speech of those in the workplace are protected by the first amendment, but only to a certain extent. In the article “Constitutional Cases Involving Teachers,” John Sanchez states, ”In 1983, the Supreme Court clarified public employees’ free speech rights. In Connick v. Myers the Court ruled that when a public employee speaks out on a matter of private or personal interest and not as a citizen on matters of public concern, the speech is not protected by the First Amendment.” This being said, if a teacher is doing things that disrupt the school environment, it is not supported by the First Amendment. For example, sharing political or religious views with students would be considered “unconstitutional”. Also, in a Los Angeles Times article, “High Court Upholds Firing of San Diego Police Officer,” David Savage states, “The 1st Amendment’s free speech protection does not shield public employees whose personal expressions and off-duty actions offend their employees, the Supreme Court said Monday in upholding the firing of a San Diego police officer who sold sexually explicit videos of himself over the Internet.” 

Both of these constitutional cases demonstrate that it can be unlawful for public employees to express themselves in a way that can disturb the environment in which they work in or offend other employees or students. In no way does that mean that teachers or other public employees can not express themselves, but it means that they need to be careful and conscious when doing so. Things such as religion, politics, or other social concepts should not interfere with the workplace environment or there could be consequences. 

Citations:

“Freedom Of Speech.” HISTORY. N. p., 2019. Web. 30 Sept. 2019.

Savage, David G. “High Court Upholds Firing of San Diego Police Officer.” Los Angeles Times, Dec 2004. 

Sanchez, John. “Constitutional Cases Involving Teachers.” Phi Delta Kappan, 06 2009.

Burning the american flag

Burning The Flag

Should you be allowed to burn the flag? 

People can burn the flag for many different reasons. Some of the reasons can be protesting against the country, symbolically insulting someone, or protest against nationalism. Burning the flag to many people see it as disrespect to the people of our nation, our military and our government. Burning the flag is not illegal to do. There are laws that if you set a fire without a permit can give you a misdemeanor though. There was an incident where a man, Gregory Lee Johnson burned the flag in Dalla, Texas. He burned the flag in protest of the president, Ronald Reagan’s policies.  Johnson argued that what he did was protected by symbolic speech. Symbolic speech is protected by the first amendment. Johnson was sentenced 1 year in jail and a 2,000 dollar fine. Burning the flag should not be illegal because everyone has different beliefs in everything and everyone expresses themselves in different ways. now , president Trump is all in for making an amendment for burning the flag. He says that he would put anyone in jail for burning the American flag. 

Works Cited

1. “Facts And Case Summary – Texas V. Johnson.” United States Courts. N. p., 2019. Web. 24 Sept. 2019.
2. Explore.proquest.com. N. p., 2019. Web. 24 Sept. 2019.
3. “Cons.” Flag burning. N. p., 2019. Web. 1 Oct. 2019.
4. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/06/15/no-brainer-trump-tweets-support-amendment-banning-flag-burning/ 

Supreme Court’s view on praying in public schools

According to the Free Exercise clause “everyone is allowed to practice their religion”, though there are some limitations. One specific place where this clause is controversial is in public schools. Obviously in private schools there is no rule against prayer, however in public schools it is unclear where to draw the line. Gene Johnson wrote about a case where a Washington public high school football coach brought his team onto the field after every game to pray. Joe Kennedy, the coach, was asked by the school district to stop his prayers, but he proceeded to do them, so he was fired. Eventually Kennedy sued, saying that his religious rights were violated. The three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. District Court of Appeals decided that his prayers were not protected free speech, because he was working as a public employee while leading the prayers. This case in particular did not reach the supreme court, but it did catch the eye of the nation. For years our country’s legal system has covered many cases on praying in school and it is clear where they lie: Praying in public schools violates the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses. 

There have been a few cases regarding this issue that have made it all the way to the supreme court, two of which were clear in their verdict, proving exactly how the court views the topic. The first case of the two occurred in 1962: Engel vs. Vitale. According to Oyez, the case was about a group of students who protested the voluntary prayer recitation at the beginning of every school day. This collective group of students believed that having this prayer, voluntary or not, violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The conclusion was a 6-1 decision for Engel, stating that there may not be any praying in school, even if it is not required and the prayer is not related to a specific religion. This case clearly displays the view of the supreme court, and there are many more like it. In fact, Oyez reported another case from 1984, Wallace vs Jaffree, that tackled the issue of conducting religious prayers in the Alabama school districts. A law in Alabama required teachers to conduct regular religious prayers/activities in the classroom during the day. The burning question of this case was if Alabama’s law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment?  Again the ruling was the same with a 6-3 decision that yes it did violate that clause. They saw it as Alabama endorsing a religion instead of remaining neutral. Verdict after verdict it is clear that the supreme court has always viewed any type of prayer in a public school as a violation of the First Amendment.

Should men in power have a “say” on a woman’s body?

One of the most politically contentious topics of my generation is a woman’s right to choose. Currently, the powerful lobbyists in Washington D.C are trying to make abortion illegal by overturning Roe vs. Wade.

Roe vs. Wade is a decision the U.S Supreme Court ruled the constitution of the United States protects a womans liberty to have an abortion without excessive government restriction. Today, 73% of Americans don’t want to see Roe vs. Wade overturned. If it were to be overturned, one third of all women of reproductive age in America could lose the ability to access safe and legal abortion in their state. It seems when you turn on the news, there is always a male politician who is talking about this issue in a negative way. Abortion is healthcare. It’s solely a decision that is made between a patient and their physician. The right to legal abortion has been law for more than 45 years. Why would politicians want to overturn something that has been around for almost half a century?

Some people say so its government can control a woman body while others see abortion as a morality or religious issue. The right to choose is a right that all women deserve to make. Abortion is very common. In fact, nearly 1 in 4 women in America will have an abortion during their lifetime. This is not a decision to be made by a group of men who think its an immoral act to have an abortion. This issue belongs to women, the act carried by her physician, and to be protected by the government.

As abortion rates drop across the US, experts are quick to point out that laws have nothing to do with it

https://now.org/update/as-abortion-rates-drop-across-the-us-experts-are-quick-to-point-out-that-laws-have-nothing-to-do-with-it

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion

https://gen.medium.com/anti-abortion-lawmakers-have-no-idea-how-womens-bodies-work-3ebea9fd6015

The First Amendment protects prayer, Is it protected at football games?

In Western Pennsylvania public schools prayer during or before sports games is generally pretty common. It’s also almost never seen anywhere else besides sports games. The coaches at these schools see it as a way to bring the teams together and get them motivated, oftentimes it seems to improve performance. They mention they don’t force religion onto anyone, the kids don’t have to participate in the group prayer, but they still encourage it. Coaches will also encourage players with minority religions to hold prayer, for more diversity. Some coaches state the only time they pray is in the locker room or before a game. It can be seen as negative to encourage students to pray considering it is something very private for some people.

The Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe case ruled that a policy permitting student-led prayer at high school football games violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Two mothers filed a lawsuit against a Santa Fe school, it was then ordered that religion can only be discussed in a non-denominational or non-judgmental way. The school adopted a policy for students to vote whether or not prayer will be held at graduations and football games, and of course, holding prayer always won. It then went to the Supreme Court after the policy received a lot of criticism and complaints. The Court ruled that the policy was unconstitutional, in the way the policy was put into place, it would no doubt offend a student or show that the school supports what is being said, no matter what.

The Superintendent of Alabama’s Trussville City schools got a letter demanding the district stop its practice of broadcasting prayer on the loudspeaker of football games. An example of one of these prayers was “Father, today we play as two separate teams, but we live as one body of Christ, as your hands and feet. And through it all we will play… ultimately to further your kingdom.” It doesn’t sound very inclusive of many religions. Similar to Santa Fe schools, people argued that prayer was held through student-initiated vote and was therefore protected by the 1st amendment, however as we know the Supreme Court disagreed. The Court decided these policies don’t protect those with minority views and places them under those with the majority view. The Constitution also doesn’t allow for schools to force students to choose to fully participate in prayer or sticking to their own beliefs.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court decided that prayer and football games just don’t fit with each other, legally. I completely agree with their decision on the legality of it in regards to the First Amendment, however I don’t necessarily agree this is how it should be. I feel it should be allowed for there to be some sort of compromise. Team members could separately pray in silence instead of someone holding a prayer as an entire team, which encourages everyone to participate.

Works Cited

“Many High School Teams Pray Before Taking The Court.” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. N. p., 2019. Web. 1 Oct. 2019.

“Santa Fe Independent School District V. Doe.” En.wikipedia.org. N. p., 2018. Web. 1 Oct. 2019.

“Why Is Prayer Over A Loudspeaker At High School Football Games Unconstitutional?.” BJC. N. p., 2019. Web. 1 Oct. 2019.

Jobs, social media, free speech, and me

Topic: Free speech on social media and how it can affect your job

Essential Question: Does the 1st Amendment protect workers from consequences for social media posts?

Many people, when they hear about freedom of speech, get confused and think “That gives me the power to say whatever I want to whoever I want, without facing any consequences!” Of course, this isn’t true. Freedom of speech gives us many rights, such as being able to freely express your political opinion, or being able to not say anything at all. With the freedom of speech we also have limits, such as not being able to promote actions that could harm others (shouting “fire!” in a crowded room/shouting “bomb!” on an airplane), and not being able to burn draft cards for anti war protests. 
With all of this in mind, let’s go back to the original question: Does the 1st Amendment protect workers from consequences for social media posts? Well, there isn’t an easy answer for this, it all depends on the situation.
If you express your political opinion online in a respectful manner, and an employer sees, they cannot punish you even if they want to. You were simply using the rights given to you by free speech, and your employer has no right to punish you in the workplace. 
On the other hand, if an employer sees you making and selling obscene and offensive products online, they have the right to punish you. In that case, freedom of speech is not protecting you, and you will have to deal with the consequences of your actions.

Social Media and Freedom of Speech in the Workplace
“Social Media And Freedom Of Speech In The Workplace.” WisBar. N. p., 2019. Web. 23 Sept. 2019.

What Does Free Speech Mean?
“What Does Free Speech Mean?.” United States Courts. N. p., 2019. Web. 1 Oct. 2019.