On October 29th, 2016, during a UW-Madison football game at Camp Randall, there was a man found wearing a costume acting like Barack Obama was being lynched. One man wearing a prisoner outfit and a Barack Obama mask on his face, a Hillary Clinton mask on the back of his head, and a noose around his neck. The other man involved, worse normal clothes with a Donald Trump Mask on. This man was seen holding the noose up that was on the other man’s neck. The assimilated the lynching of both Clinton and Obama. In terms of this being within the two men’s freedom’s of speech and expression, it is. The only thing that is illegal to do under the context of the president is to say something. There is nothing about acting out a President’s death. Someone is not allowed to say “I want to kill the President” or “Someone should kill the President”. Doing what these men did is highly offensive, but is within their rights. The one way this could be pushed to fall outside the lines of freedom of speech is obscenity. This states that “any utterance or act that strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time”. Meaning, if this offended the majority of the stadium, then this act can be considered outside the boundaries of freedom of speech and expression.
First off people who say their going to burn the flag are doing it to protest the government.
If burning the flag is not a protected form of speech, is kneeling for the National Anthem protected? Most people would say yes because it is a peaceful way to protest something, but according to thelawdictionary.org, burning the flag is also showing a form of peaceful protest. If burning the flag is illegal, then kneeling for the National Anthem is illegal right? Even though they are both protesting peacefully. But according to cnn.com neither president Trump nor congress can criminalize it.
Should satire be allowed? The Daily Show, The Colbert Report, and Saturday Night Live are some of our favorite television shows. All of these television shows are common examples of satire. These shows have made way into our homes, and helped us learn about politics and other information while making fun of them and giving us laughter as we learn. The definition of satire, according to Google, is the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.
Satire is sometimes questioned on whether it should be allowed in places or television. Some people believe that it gives false information to people and can affect their life in a bad way. In 2008, Pew Research Center released a study that listed Jon Stewart as the fourth most trusted American journalist. There is a lot of criticism on this, because Jon Stewart is mostly known for his satire, making fun of other people or giving false information on politics. Jon Stewart responded by saying that he does not share false stories, his impressions are false. People who support satire say that it is informative, and it explains issues and politics in a comedic way, or makes fun of something. Also, people say that it is a right. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution gives people freedom of speech; it gives people a chance to state their beliefs to society. Some people feel like their beliefs are wrong when satire pokes at their values and calls them stupid for believing something.
Most of America agrees with me, in that satire should be allowed. It is apart of our freedom of speech. A lot of it can be informative, and it doesn’t mean you have to have the same beliefs. Satire is funny and informative, and helps make people’s lives better, while teaching us about politics.
Hg.org. N. p., 2018. Web. 19 Feb. 2018.