Civil Rights and Liberties
1. Should freedom of speech be limited and why? If yes, then how do we limit it? Use specific examples to support your answer.
Although the concept of “freedom of speech” is granted to all Americans and is protected by the First Amendment in the Bill of Right that states “Congress shall make now law abridging the freedom of speech,” I definitely think that freedom of speech should be limited in some situations. If you take a look around, you will be able to recognize numerous instances where the concept of freedom of speech, that some take for granted, often hurts and devastates others. Many of the times without realizing, we make even simple statements to our friends and classmates that can likely leave our friends feelings insulted due to our freedom of speech. Adding onto the simple insults we can make with our freedom of speech without even realizing, the widespread use of internet now allows many people to express their opinions freely with anonymity, leading to an increase in the numbers of cyber bullying and verbal harassment which further influence people in detrimental ways. We can already see what harm too much right on freedom of speech in our daily lives can do to the people and society. Due to some taking advantage and missing the valuable right of freedom of speech, there certainly must be an appropriate amount of limit to freedom of speech.
Similar to the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1798 which banned all speech and publication that slandered United States and its actions, I think Korea should have stricter and forceful laws that will actually scare and prohibit many from taking the freedom of speech for granted. Even though there are services where you can report and delete comments and posts, I don’t think these have been very effective in preventing the misuse of freedom of speech.
http://muslimwriters.org/2012/09/24/freedom-of-speech-comes-with-responsibility/
2. Do you think the state should be completely separated from religion? Should government never interfere with religious activities Explain.
I personally believe that the state should be completely separated from religion. First of all, the state complies with an individual’s public life, while religion complies with an individual’s private life. Second of all, not everybody practices and values the same religion. If the state and religion were entwined, this means that the government would have the ability to control and even enforce a particular religion for its citizens. However, the first amendment states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Also, I believe that the practice of religion should be a personal choice rather than an enforcement. Moreover, if the state and religion were to be connected, the government is most likely to express favoritism towards a particular religion, making it unfair for those who practice a different religion from that of the government.
The example of the Abington School District vs. Schempp demonstrate why the state and religion should be separated. In the 1960s, students who attended the public schools in the state of Pennsylvania were required to read the Bible everyday. As the state of Pennsylvania forced a child to participate in Bible reading and prayer, this not only violated the first amendment of the Bill of Rights and went against the right of free religion, but also forced a child to practice a religion that he or she was not interested in. Therefore, I think it’s best for the government to not become intertwined with religion, let the religious organizations lead their own activities, and let the people choose whether or not to practice which religion.
http://muslimwriters.org/2012/09/24/freedom-of-speech-comes-with-responsibility/
3. From the four controversial events, which event made the most impact to today's rights for the accused? The cases were Miranda vs. Arizona, Escobedo vs Illinois, Mapp vs. Ohio, and Gideon vs. Wainwright.
Amongst the four controversial events, I think the single event that has made the most impact to today’s rights for the accused is the Miranda vs. Arizona court case. When a kidnapping and sexual assault occurred in Phoenix, Arizona on March 1963, Ernesto Miranda was thought as a suspect and was arrested in his home to the investigation room at the police station. Although two hours later the investigators had a written confession signed by Miranda, because the police did not tell Miranda of his rights to counsel prior to questioning, Arizona clearly violated the 5th amendment to remain silent and the 6th Amendment right to legal counsel. I think this had the most impact because although not many know of other rights people have when accused, due to this controversial event, many are more aware of the Miranda Warnings and those two rights they have when accused.
Also, another court case that I thought was interesting and useful to us is the Gideon vs. Wainwright case. When Gideon was arrested in 1961 for breaking and entering with the intention of committing theft, he requested for a state-appointed lawyer as he did not have enough money. However, his request was denied and was sentenced to 5 years of prison. As Gideon filed another court review on his case, the Supreme Court ruled that Gideon’s 6th amendment right to legal counsel was violated. Due to this case, many know are aware of the fact that when you are in a position where you cannot afford a lawyer, you may request to be provided with one. Therefore, through these two controversial events, I believe that people are able to become more familiar with the rights and not become a victim of unjust ruling.
 |
| http://deluca6thhour.wikispaces.com/Miranda+v+Arizona |
4. Based on the world today, was the gender equality movement successful? How about within South Korea? Give specific examples.
Based on the world today, I would say that the gender equality movement was successful. Around the world, there has been a great increase in the population of women working, women in the job field as much as men, and women earning equal payments as men. The Frontiero vs. Richardson court case in 1973 contributed to the success of the gender equality movement. This case declared that “laws differentiating by sex are inherently suspect and subject to strict judicial scrutiny.” Also, the Corning Glass Works vs. Brennan of 1974 now makes it against the constitution to pay workers differently depending on their genders. Although there are some circumstances of gender discrimination, as a whole, I personally believed that the gender equality movement was successful.
I also think that the gender equality movement was also successful in South Korea. Like we see around the world, we see just as many females working as men, just as many females working in diverse fields as men, and women getting paid equally as men. One example of why i think the movement was a success is Korea’s first female president, Park GeunHye. Due to the success of the movement, we now see a female leading a country, which was never expected before the situations and expectations improved. However, through the example of Park GeunHye, we see that females are capable of doing the jobs only men were expected to perform and how people’s perception and stereotypes on females have also changed to vote for a female president. I hope that we can continue on spreading the successes of the gender equality movement throughout the world and improve the conditions for women in the countries that are still facing gender discrimination.
 |
| http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/mar/05/south-korea-un-north-korea-rights |
5. What evidence of discrimination do we still see today in the United States? If there was a Civil Rights Act of 2014, what factors would you include and which minority groups would be included?
Although we see less discrimination to what we saw in the past, it would be a lie to say that we now don’t see any discrimination at all now. Due to the Civil Rights act of 1964 which outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, we now see the trend of discrimination in a lesser degree than in the past. However, I think the difference in the races is so deeply engrained in us that there are still traces of racial discrimination in our lives, such as the jokes that people make, and movies and tv shows that focus on the difference in races to entertain their audience. If a new Civil Rights Act was to be written in 2014, factors that deal with racial discrimination would still be focused on as we continue to see problems of racial discrimination, though in a lesser degree.
 |
| http://fortheloveofpetersburg.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/recognizing-the-civil-rights-act-of-1964/ |
