Sec. of State Hillary Rodham Clinton last week had strong words about the video itself, but listen carefully to what she had to say about the First Amendment. What is your reaction to her explanation to other countries?
The First Amendment is both a blessing and a curse. It ensures people's right to free speech, even when that speech is distasteful or even insulting to other people. Last year the U.S. Supreme Court made a highly controversial decision when it ruled in favor of a church that preaches against gays at military funerals. Read this article for some background on the case, then listen to this CNN interview for a better explanation. Do you think the Supreme Court made the correct ruling?
Creative Commons photo: IIP State/Meg Riggs
I think Hillary Clinton explained the U.S. Government's position well because I do feel that even though the video was horrible the Government had nothing to do with it and does not back anything in the video, and I do not think that the people targeted in this video should have acted out violently against the U.S. embassy. I also think that even though the Westboro protests were horrible and should not protest at funerals especially military I do think that the Supreme Court made the right decision because technically they did not violate anything in the First Amendment and if the Supreme Court were to rule differently just because they did not agree with Westboro then they would have the right to do that with other things that maybe we would support.
ReplyDeleteI believe Hillary Clinton did the best that she could do by letting other countries and Muslim people know that the United States government does not support this video that insulted Muslims , which is on Youtube. Although I wish the government could force Google to remove the video. As for the military funerals, I believe that any type of protesting at funerals and church events should be illegal because it violates the people's freedom of religion and although the protesters can legally hold anti-gay signs at funerals, I believe that this should not be legal.
ReplyDeleteHillary Clinton explained the First Amendment Rights well. She stated that people have immigrated from all over the world to the United States in order to have the First Amendment Rights our country's citizens have. She made it clear that the United States (obviously) had nothing to do with the creation of the video. As offensive and horrible the video is,the man who created did have the rights to. As of the Westbro protests, I do think the Supreme Court made the right decision. Although the protests were sickening, the church was doing it in a peaceful manner on public property. Therefore, they were not breaking any rules. Both of these issues show that even though the vast majority may agree that the acts themselves are awful, they are still legal and protected under every citizen's First Amendment Right as long as they are done peacefully and do not break any laws.
ReplyDeleteI feel that Hillary Clinton addressed the situation very well by first making it clear that the United States government had no association with or supported the video at all. I agreed with Clinton when she said that although the video was horrible and "disgusting", the man who created the anti- Muslim video had the right to do it under the First Amendment. The story about the protesting at the military funeral breaks my heart, but looking at the case, the church did not break any laws since it was peaceful and done on public property. Morally, I feel that the church's action to protest was very wrong, but they had rights protected by the First Amendment. It is apparent that the First Amendment is a blessing and a curse. Sometimes people take advantage of the rights and it leads to cases such as these two listed above.
ReplyDeleteI,personally, admire the way Hillary Clinton approached this issue. She gave two sides to the argument, by first stating that the video was "disgusting" and uncalled for. She then recognizes the fact that though the video was inappropriate and disrespectful, violence is not the way to answer. I also like how she made it perfectly clear that the U.S. govenrment was in no way involved with the making of this video. She is protecting the U.S., and also recognizing that the video was a terrible insult to a major world religion.
ReplyDeleteI believe the Supreme Court did make the right decision about the anti-gay protesting case. Although what the church was protesting about is morally wrong, they did not infringe upon others rights. In the interview, the man specifically states that the protesters were 200-300 feet away from the funeral, and they could not even be heard. To me, it seems that the protesters had no desire to interrupt the funneral, they only wanted to voice their opinion. The Supreme Court based their decision off of the First Amendment, and therefore I believe their ruling was correct.
I think that Hillary Clinton's explanation of the United States Government's position was very well spoken. She made it clear that the U.S. government condemned the videos and did not support them in any way. She explained the First Amendment well also. She was correct in saying that the First Amendment protects all types of speech (no matter how distasteful), but the line must be drawn at violence. She made it clear that the video was a horrible offense, but she also stressed that the protesters had no right to act violently because of it. I believe that both the video and the violent protests were fundamentally wrong. The Westboro protests were horrible, and I cannot fathom how the members of Westboro could commit such an inhuman act. Provoking and insulting people who are in mourning because of the loss of a person close to them is wrong, and the protests dishonored the deceased people. Funerals are meant to be peaceful sendoffs. However, the court was right to rule in favor of the church, because the First Amendment clearly protects such peaceful protests. The protests did not even directly affect the funerals. They were wrong, but protected under the First Amendment.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Hillary Clinton had an appropriate explanation of our first amendment rights to other countries. She stated that we support all religions and the practice of any religion is protected under the first amendment of our constitution. However, another right protected under the first amendment is freedom of expression, no matter "how distasteful" the expression is. This is why the video can not be taken down.
ReplyDeleteIn the Westboro church protests I do agree with the court's ruling. Although the expression was hateful, it followed the time, place and manner restrictions and did not "disrupt" the funeral. However, I believe the protest was morally wrong and the families should have the right to grieve in peace. This case shows how difficult it is to distinguish what is constitutionally correct from what you think is emotionally acceptable.
I think that Hillary Clinton was very well spoken and I agree with her in the fact that the Government had nothing to do with the video and also that the other countries should not have reacted with violence. In the Westboro case I think that the court ruling was fair because everyone has a right to their own opinion. I do not think it was appropriate that the Westboro chuch would support people to protest at someones funeral,
ReplyDeleteeven though it is not illegal it is not the right thing to do.
I believe that Hillary Clinton spoke about the viral video very well. She did an excellent job defending the governments position, while also explaining how the video was very cruel and "disgusting". However, although that video was very detestable, there was no reason in reacting with violence. We (America) have had open arms to all religions since day one, however, we also give the right to opinions, which is why this video is still online.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with the court's ruling in Westboro. Although what the protesters were doing was considered very disrespectful, they had every right to be doing what they were. Their speech hadn't interfered with the ceremony, and they were at a good distance from the ceremony. Just like Mr. Jeffrey Toobin said, "its a very frustrating case, but also a very easy one."
I believe that Hillary Clinton's speech on behalf of the U.S government was well written and stated the main fact, that the U.S government had nothing to do with the anti- Islamic video. By Hillary coming out and stating this to the world, it lets the people of Libya and Egypt know that they cannot blame the entire U.S population for a crime committed by one man. She stated that the U.S is home to all religions and does not separate nor discriminate based upon religion. I believe the courts ruling on Westboro was wrong and they should not have given people the right to protest at a persons funeral. That is a time meant for mourning and loss for the family,and should not be used as a way for people demonstrate their opinions toward a persons life style.
ReplyDeleteI disagree strongly with the fact that Westboro Baptist Church protested during a homosexual male's funeral. I understand that everyone has their opinion on gays in the military but that is absolutely NO excuse to protest during someone's funeral. I do not think the first Amendment should protect the Westboro Church because what they are doing is morally wrong no matter what the bible says. Does it sound like a Christian thing to do when you make a sign saying " God Hates Fags"? Also, i enjoyed Hillary Clinton's speech. I thought she did a great job with sympathizing with the Muslim community while at the same time stating that violence is never the answer. When i watched the actual anti- Muslim video i was appalled. It is very disrespectful and depicts Muhammad as being a sexual predator and a barbaric person. Hillary Clinton used the right words when she said the video is disgusting! In the video the actor and actresses had on bronzing lotion to give off the appearance of someone living in the middle east. That alone is very disrespectful because you should never make fun of the color of someones skin. How would feel as Christians to see Jesus, our Lord and Savior depicted in such manner and have other people leave crude and rude remarks on the web about the video?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Hillary Clinton said it best when she stated that "there is no justification, none at all, for responding to this video with violence." She expressed the country's dislike for for the video in a professional way, while explaining that our First Amendment protects our right of speech. I highly disagree with Google, and think the video should be taken down. It can be argued that if we start restricting our freedom now, where and when will we draw the line? There have been a number of deaths and harsh riots as a result of this video. I believe authorities should be able to step and sensor the web if something majorly puts people's safety at risk.
ReplyDeleteI side with Supreme Court regarding the church protests. Though I believe it is morally wrong to hold anti-gay protests at funerals, it is the people's right to do so.
It would be impinging on their rights to stop them. As long as they keep the protests peaceful and don't interfere with the funeral going on.
Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton did an exceptional job of explaining the United States' position on the following points: the video's content and message, the United States' religious tolerance, our nation's freedom of speech and expression, and the unthinkable violence that has occurred. Secretary Clinton explained that the United States' government had nothing to do with the video, and that our nation is home to the people of all religions and faith. She also stated that the video is "disgusting and reprehensible," and it degrades religion, and, "provokes rage." She clearly stated that the United States' freedom of speech allows its citizens to express themselves, "no matter how distasteful they may be. " Most importantly, she communicated that violence in response to speech is, "not acceptable." I applaud Secretary Clinton for her leadership and her powerful speech.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the Supreme Court's ruling to throw out the $5 million lawsuit; although I do not support Westboro Baptist Church's anti-gay protests outside military funerals, I fully understand the Supreme Court's ruling in upholding the First Amendment and the right of the Westboro Baptist Church to protest during funerals. From the reading of the article, it appears that the protest was a political speech that did not involve any confrontation, was conducted on public property, and did not interfere with the ceremony. In my opinion, the Supreme Court decision reinforces the law, no matter how distasteful and disrespectful Westboro Baptist Church's actions were.
I believe Hillary Clinton did a good job of explaining the U.S. government's view on the video that has sparked violence around the world. I thought it was good she verbalized that the government had nothing to do with the video. I like how she brought up the fact that this country has been built on the fact that we are open to all religions and any religion is allowed. Her comment about how other countries may not agree with the First Amendment but they should agree that violence is not the answer was my favorite part of the speech. I absolutely agree that no matter how awful this video was, violence was not the answer. As for the Westboro Church case, I do believe the Supreme Court made the right decision. Due to the fact the protesters were on public land and did not disrupt the actual ceremony, they should be protected under the First Amendment to voice any opinions they have. However, I do think it is awful the protesters from the West Baptist Church would use their First Amendment right to disturb a fallen soldiers funeral ceremony when the reason our First Amendment right is protected is because of the soldiers who fight for our country to keep us free.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I am not a fan of Hilary Clinton, I believe that she did her best effort in trying to explain to other countries that the United States had no involvement with the production of the video protesting Muslims. She highlighted the fact that America is tolerant of religions and let their citizens practice whatever religion they wish. With the Westboro Supreme Court case I am in disagreement with the Supreme Court's ruling. The protestors had the right to assembly, in this case protest, due to their first amendment right. However, the signs they were holding were distasteful and disturbing the peace. These signs can be interepreted as hate signs and this is a fine line with another aspect of our first amendment right, the freedom of speech. Although the case has already been tried, I feel that the Supreme Court should have ruled differenly.
ReplyDeleteHilary Clinton makes a valid point in response to the attacks in Libya and Syria that we do have freedom of speech in America and that the government does not stop individuals from expressing their views, whatever they may be. I do think the Supreme Court made the right ruling, but I do not think it should be the right ruling. I'm fine with protestors protesting, but why military funerals? These are men who died for our country, and you're holding up signs that say Thank God for Dead Soldiers? It sickens me to see a group of people who claim to be Christian behaving that way. Freedom of speech is a double-edged sword because while you can have freedom to say what you think, there is also freedom for lies and slander. Is that really good for America?
ReplyDeleteI believe that Hilary Clinton did a great job stating that the U.S. government had nothing to do with this video. She explained it very well and said the they are not allowed to take the video down because of the First Amendment. The First Amendment allows us to expression our opinions and beliefs and this is a man expressing his opinion. In the Westboro Courtcase, I think that these protesters had a right to protest, because the way they protested was fine. There was no violence in this protest, and they were a reasonable distance away from the funeral. Because of the First Amendment, they are allowed to protest peacefully.
ReplyDeleteEven though the video was very offensive to the Muslim religion, the man who made this video is secured under First Amendment and was allowed to voice his opinion. Hilary Clinton is a very strong and independent women, and I admire her for speaking for the government and stating that they had nothing to do with it and that it does not speak for the American government. In the Westboro Case, their right to assemble peacefully is also secured under the first amendment due to the fact that it wasn't done in a harmful and violent way and they did not interfere with the funeral, so I do agree with the Supreme Court's decision.
ReplyDelete