Informative Speech on Hyperthyroidism Essay
From a general physiological point of view, several human body activities and systems are controlled by hormones. These biochemical substances may therefore alter the normal body functioning or restore its normalcy depending on the existing conditions of the body.
It is important that correct measures of particular hormones are maintained to avoid occurrence of health complications associated with hormonal imbalance in the body. This essay synthesizes Hyperthyroidism, a disease caused by overproduction of thyroid hormone in the human body. Among other sections, the essay covers the definition of the disease, causes, symptoms, prevalence and treatment.
Hyperthyroidism is a hormonal disease, which occurs when there is excess production of thyroid hormone in the human body system. Thyroid hormone is produced by thyroid, a gland found in the front of a person’s neck. This hormone is very essential to body operations as it regulates metabolic rate, a process through which food is converted into energy (Carlton, 2011).
As a result, it affects cholesterol, heart, bones and muscles. This implies that any deviation from the normal production of thyroid hormone can result into a wide range of complications, most of which are fatal. For instance high thyroid production may lead to excessive sweating, faster heartbeat, nervousness and being moody among other changes. In some cases, the disease may be diagnosed accidently due to lack of distinct symptoms.
As mentioned in the above segment, Hyperthyroidism can manifest itself in countless ways. It is worth noting that the disease can mimic signs and symptoms associated with other health complications, making it difficult to be diagnosed and treated. Weight loss is a common symptom, where patients drop their weight regardless of their normal appetite.
In cases where the heartbeat changes patients may experience tachycardia, irregular heartbeat or palpitations. Changes in bowl movement and physical enlargement of thyroid are also common symptoms. In women, Hyperthyroidism may result into alteration of menstrual cycles (Rowland, Schumann & Ewigman, 2009).
It has to be underscored that Hyperthyroidism affects both men and women, since human bodies produce thyroid hormone. However, research indicates that there is variation of prevalence among men and women and the presence of some diseases further act as predisposing factors.
For instance, people with leukocyte antigen (HLA)-DRw3 are at higher risk of developing the disease together with those having HLA-Bw35 (Iglesias et al., 2010). The presence of iodine in a particular region may determine the likelihood of the disease occurring since the element acts as an immune stimulator.
Apart from these predisposing factors, Hyperthyroidism is caused by Grave’s disease. One of the complications of this disease is that the body’s defense systems attacks and destroys thyroid gland (Rowland, Schumann & Ewigman, 2009). The body usually responds to this condition by producing excess thyroid hormone, triggering the onset of the above mentioned complications.
Hyperthyroidism can be treated in several ways, depending on a number of factors like age of the patient, severity of the condition and physical manifestation of the disease. These approaches may include drug therapies, nutritional supplements and herbs among others. Radioactive iodine is commonly used to cause shrinking of thyroid gland and subsiding of symptoms (Carlton, 2011).
Additionally, anti-thyroid medications like Tapazole reduce manifested symptoms by preventing production of thyroid hormone.
On the other hand, beta blockers are used to lower the heartbeat even though they do not affect the production of thyroid hormone. In rare cases, surgery may be recommended. Nutritional approach includes the elimination of certain foods from the diet as medically recommended and introduction of others in specified quantities.
Carlton, S. (2011). Peeling Sluggish: Bloated? Always Cold? Good Housekeeping, 252 (8), 59-64.
Iglesias et al. (2010). Severe hyperthyroidism: aetiology, clinical features and treatment outcome. Clinical Endocrinology, 72 (4), 551-557.
Rowland, K., Schumann, S., & Ewigman, B. (2009). What caused this case of asymptomatic hyperthyroidism? Journal of Family Practice, 58 (4), 203-206.
Freedom of Speech Analytical Essay
Freedom of speech is the freedom that citizens are constitutionally granted by their country to allow the citizens to speak without limitations or censorship of what they say.
This freedom varies from country to country depending on levels of democracy and political situations. Freedom of speech is always advocated for and governments urged to constitutionally protect their citizens’ freedom of speech to enable people discuss issues that affect them.
There have also been views of negative effects of unmonitored freedom of speech calling for a balance between the freedom of speech and its limitations. This paper seeks to discuss freedom of speech. The paper will look at the human nature that necessitates speech and expression, freedom of speech as applied in different countries and limitations that freedom of speech faces.
Importance of freedom of speech
The nature of human beings to coexist with one another and developments that have led to democratic government systems have made speech and interactions fundamental elements in every society.
Developments of government systems and establishment of democracies have played a role in enlisting the participation of citizens in government processes in order to uphold the already established democratic levels in societies. It is this need to retain or even further develop democratic systems that has in the past led to the fight for freedom of speech.
The same reason still plays an important role in ensuring that provisions of freedom of speech are correctly implemented to take care of the intentions that were originally considered during formulations of such policies that governs freedom of speech. The nature of human beings to interact and communicate with one another is another element that necessitates freedom of speech.
Economic, political and even social aspects of life require an ultimate decision regarding a course of action to be taken regarding any particular issue. Matters that affect a large mass of people such as politics and national economic matters have been regarded as public aspects that are determined collectively (Mediainst 1).
Citizens therefore find it necessary to participate in such discussions pertaining to these public issues with the aim of checking and putting to task leaders and representatives to ensure that the interest of the people are looked into. Interactive forums also help people to be informed on current and developing issues in a society.
Freedom of speech, therefore, allows for transfer of information that helps different category of people in decision making. Effective decisions regarding election of political leaders, management of business activities and even personal and family decisions depends on information.
Information about government economic policies and trends in a country will, for example, affect small scale business established in a given township. Freedom of speech and access to information is therefore critical to citizens in their daily lives (Mediainst 1).
Freedom of speech
Freedom of speech is an element that is occasionally protected by laws of various countries. In the United States, for example, freedom of speech is strictly protected by the country’s first amendment.
According to the first amendment, freedom of speech is protected from manipulation by selfish individuals such as politicians who could be in power and intend to undermine criticisms from the general public.
For this reason, the first amendment of the United States constitution provided protection of the freedom of speech from legislative institutions such as the congress. Freedom of speech has also been liberalized in the United States to include non verbal expressions, motions and symbols that includes dressing codes (Camp 1).
Xinyi Wang explained the elements of the United States’ first amendment, which clearly, or as one would think it does, expresses the sanctity of freedom of speech in the United States. The constitution expressly states that the congress is prohibited from making legislations that would touch on the freedom of speech.
The first amendment also included other elements that are related to freedom of speech such as issues pertaining to the press and the fact that Americans were allowed to converge and share opinions in a peaceful manner and to stand and question their government in case the citizens felt aggrieved by the government (Xinyi 1).
In its application, freedom of speech protects subjects from liability to whatever they say, provided that the subject statements uttered by an individual are under the protection of freedom of speech as provided by a particular country.
Freedom of speech enjoyed by legislators in their course of legislation for example protects them from any liability emanating from anything that the legislatures say while in their legislative process.
The constitution of Canada for example provides that “no legislative councilor or member of the legislative assembly shall be liable to any action, arrest, or imprisonment, or damages” (Canadian constitution 69) as long as subject commission were undertaken in a process of conducting legislative duties in the premises for such duties (Canadian constitution 69).
In Britain, legislatures are only protected from speech uttered in their process of legislation. A similar application of the freedom of speech is applicable to other citizens.
Provisions are made by constitutions in different countries regarding freedoms that citizens are accorded with regard to speech and measures are then taken to ensure that subject to constitutional provisions, no citizens are held liable to any utterance that is made within constitutional provisions of freedom of speech (Canadian constitution 69).
Limitations to freedom of speech
Even though freedom of speech is expressly stated in a number of countries’ constitutions, and provisions made that freedom of speech shall be utterly protected by constitutions, a review of application of law by judicial systems reveals that constitutional provisions of freedom of speech have under certain circumstances been overridden by other factors.
When freedom of speech is not applicable, for whatever legal reason, then it means that constitutional provisions on the freedom have limitations with respect to interpretation and application. In the United States, for example, matters such as: “national security, justice or personal safety-overrides freedom of speech” (Freedomforum 1).
This means that an individual’s freedom of speech will be overlooked if any or all of these three issues are involved. A person whose speech threatens such issues like national security or infringes rights of other citizens might not be protected by freedom of speech.
The judicial system in the United States has, for example, established over time that utterances that: poses a threat to causing danger or violence, undermine “social value” and “conflict with other legitimate social or government interests” (Freedomforum 1) are not protected by freedom of speech (Freedomforum 1).
Limitations in the freedom of speech are also propagated by international bodies such as the United Nations. According to the United Nations resolution in its 1948 general assembly, it was agreed upon that as much as people had to be accorded freedom of expression, countries and states were not prevented from establishing measures that can possibly regulate parties in their process of disseminating information.
It was resolved that freedom of speech and freedom of expression calls for a level of responsibility on the parts of citizens and entities and thus governments were not restricted by the resolution from “requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises” (Whitmore 1).
The resolution at the United Nations assembly also stated that freedom of speech was subjected matters that are fundamental to “democratic society, interest of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for protection of health or morals” (Whitmore 1) among other factors.
This resolution thus recognizes territorial sovereignty in legislations that limits freedom of speech of an individual when it is considered to undermine sensitive public issues (Whitmore 1).
There are a number of limitations which have been imposed on freedom of speech within the United States. Obscenity has, for example, been expressly excluded from freedom of speech by the judicial system of the United States.
Other limitations on freedom of speech and press in the United States include “child pornography, defamation, speech harmful to children, compelled speech” (Cohen 26) among others. The need for limitation of freedom of speech is also expressed by Sadurski Wojciech in an argument that “self fulfillment” should be accompanied by self-control (Sadurski 18).
Freedom of speech is considered to bring satisfaction to individuals and for this reason, people must ensure that their freedom does not harm the fulfillment that other people wants to enjoy. Limitations are therefore necessary to ensure that every citizen enjoys his or her freedom (Sadurski 18).
Freedom of speech is important in a democratic nation and is internationally recognized and advocated for. It has been entrenched in a number of national constitutions and over time enhanced due to movements of human rights activists.
The provision and protection of freedom of speech by national constitutions is however at the same time limited by the same constitutions subject to rights of other citizens and national interests.
Camp, Julie. Freedom of expression. California State University, 2005. Web.
Canadian constitution. The Canadian constitution. Canada: UAP archive. Print.
Cohen, Henry. Freedom of speech and press: exceptions to the first amendment. FAS, 2009. Web.
Freedomforum. Education for freedom. Freedom Forum. Web.
Mediainst. Importance of freedom of speech. Medianst. Web.
Sadurski, Wojciech. Freedom of speech and its limits. New York, NY: Springer, 2001. Print.
Whitmore Marc. Freedom of speech, restrictions on. Idebate Organization, 2009. Web.
Xinyi, Wang. Freedom of speech in the United States constitution. Perspectives. Web.
Commemorative Speech about World Relief Essay
The world has many organizations, which engage in charitable causes. For me, the non-profit organization World Relief stands out as one of the noblest agencies and its actions provoke admiration.
The organization’s motto is to “serve the world most vulnerable” and it accomplishes this noble task though its staff and volunteers. The organization’s efforts are commendable since they make a difference in the lives of thousands of vulnerable people in the US and all over the world.
The most endearing attribute of World Relief is its passion to assist the vulnerable. In response to the vast suffering experienced by the vulnerable in the world, the organization takes action to assist.
It does this by soliciting for funds from individuals and businesses and then using this money to make the most impact in the lives of the vulnerable. The support offered by World Relief is not limited to monetary but also capacity building through its training and mentorship programs. The organization has exhibited huge innovation in its quest to assist the vulnerable.
By mobilizing individuals and the community to champion the cause of the poor, the organization has been successful in delivering aid to those who need it (World Relief 1). By stressing on the impact that an individual can make, many people have been inspired to play a part in assisting the needy in their communities. World Relief has therefore made people more aware and responsive to the needs of the needy around them.
World Relief exhibits high level of integrity in its conduct. While some charity organizations have been plagued by scandals involving misuse of funds, World Relief continues to uphold integrity and high ethical standards.
The organization offers all its annual reports and financial statements on its website and anyone is able to see how the organization uses its funds. This high level of transparency increases the public’s confidence in the organization. The organization demonstrates foresight in its activities and hopes to provide long-term solutions.
While the organization is quick to serve the vulnerable at all times, it places emphasis on empowering the local church so that it can assist the vulnerable by improving their economical wellbeing. The same approach is used in dealing with the refugees and immigrants who come to the US. Through its resettlement efforts, the organization helps the immigrants to adjust to the American culture and it assists them to find employment and become independent and productive members of the society.
The organization also exhibits bravery by venturing into war-torn regions where thousands of people are suffering from the devastating effects of war.
In such regions, Global Relief tries to assist the communities to get back on their feet. While engaging in these tasks, Global Relief staff might be exposed to danger from warring factions. Even so, the organization is willing to risk the personal costs in order to assist others thought these humanitarian efforts. The United Nations commended the humanitarian efforts of World Relief in Sudan (2).
I believe that with these qualities, the non-profit organization World Relief will continue to have a huge impact in the lives of hundreds of thousands all over the world. By championing the cause of the vulnerable to the society, the organization has been able to raise funds which have made a positive difference in the lives of the vulnerable. For this reason, the organization deserves praise and commendation from everyone.
United Nations. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Aug. 2011. Web.
World Relief. World Relief: Mission and Vision. Jan. 2012. Web.
Speech Before Her Troops Analysis and Summary Essay
Throughout history, speeches have been used as effective means for expressing yourself to the masses. Leaders on all levels have come to appreciate the fact that a well crafted speech can be a powerful agent when trying to evoke particular sentiments in people.
Queen Elizabeth I of England proved to be a powerful and compelling orator in her speech to her troops as they prepared to take up arms against the Spanish Armada in 1588.
In this paper, I shall review her speech with the aim of deducing the main arguments that the queen advanced. Her feelings towards her audience shall be inferred based on her words. The queen’s ideas and beliefs will also be highlighted from the contents of the speech.
This speech is addressed to the English troops at the battle field. The queen understands the sacrifice that the troops are about to make for their country and for this she proclaims them noble and worthy subjects. The apparent reason for the queen’s speech is to motivate her troops in the face of the imminent conflict with the Spaniards.
The queen aims to convince the troops that their fight is for a worthy cause and that their noble action of defending their country will not go unnoticed by the queen and the people of England. The queen empathizes with the soldiers and concedes that despite there being lives lost in the heat of the battle, England will be safe.
The battle that England faces is against Spain, an equally matched opponent at that point in time. The queen asserts that while some may view surrendering to Spain as the safe means, this would be equivalent to treachery to the motherland. By making such a strong declaration, the queen aims to appeal to the patriotism of the soldiers. She further states that she is also ready and willing to die in battle for the kingdom of England together with her soldiers should she be called upon to do so.
From Elizabeth’s words, we can tell with certainty that she is a patriot at heart and the honor of her country is of great importance to her. It is this same values that she intends to impart onto the soldiers for it is on them that the fate of England will lie.
It is also apparent that Elizabeth believes that her country’s troops are not only a match for the Spaniards but that they have the capability of conquering the Spanish forces in battle. With this conviction, she predicts a short lived confrontation in which England emerges victorious.
The speech suggests that there exists some religious animosity between the two warring nations. One can deduce from the reference to the Spanish forces by the queen as “enemies of my God” that there were religious undertones that surrounded the conflict. Bearing in mind that the Spanish people were the leading Catholic power while England had embraced the Protestant sect, it is evident that the two facets of the Christian religion were at loggerheads.
The light in which women were viewed during this period in history can also be learnt from this speech. The queen contends that she has but the “body of a weak and feeble woman.” This indicates that the women in England were viewed as weak people who needed protecting. Her declaration that she is willing to take up a sword and fight for the country is as a last resort; that is if her nation should be invaded. The queen is certain that her troops would not let the situation degenerate to such an extent.
This paper set out to analyze the speech by Queen Elizabeth so as to discover the various ideas advanced through the speech. It has been identified that this speech was mainly aimed at motivating England’s troops before they faced the Spanish forces in battle. However, the analysis provided in this paper demonstrates that religious differences also played a part in the conflict between Spain and England.
Humanizing Globalization’ Professional Analysis of Speech Essay
Professional Analysis of Speech
World Trade Organization’s Director General Pascal Lamy delivered the speech titled ‘Humanizing Globalization’ the on January 30, 2006, in Santiago, Chile. Lamy’s use of language is exemplified hereunder.
Imagery and figures of speech– Lamy’s speech is rather limited. The only imagery and symbolism in the speech emerges when he appears to equate recent events on the global stage to military activity or even social upheaval. He talks of technological ‘revolution’, social and economical ‘forces’ and ‘a new territorial dimension.’ Apart from these few panoramic sweeps of the events shaping the world today, the rest of his speech remains literal.
Lamy’s speech is lacking in humour yet it is not dry. Humour breaks the walls between speaker and audience through shared laughter. This is important when the speaker is presenting an argument in which he hopes the audience will eventually see things from his or her point of view and act accordingly.
The battle is not just for the minds but also for the hearts of the audience. What Lamy’s speech lacks in humour he compensates for with kind words towards the host country. His warmth toward the host is further evident when he praises Chile’s commendable role in international trade. He also honours the capable authority of President Ricardo Lagos; a man he salutes with admiration and announces to that entire he takes pride in their friendship.
Irony– In his magnanimity with praise, Lamy gives us the impression that there are certain points in which he disagrees with either the policies of President Lagos or the theme of the seminar, namely ‘humanization of globalization’. This is ironic considering that he had just declared his admiration of Chile’s president and his policies.
Idioms– Lamy’s usage of idioms is evident in phrases like ‘more and more people’ ‘globalization on individuals,’ and ‘opening up’. Their use relevant and Lamy has succeeded in incorporating them in to the formal tone of his speech.
Imagery– The speech lacks in imagery, although Lamy’s response to the “humanizing of globalisation” is testament that he has been drawn into the imagery made up by the seminar organisers. Considering that globalisation is a concept that has no human characteristics, how then can it be humanised, one may ask. Lamy’s response seems lays bare his opinion that what the world needs is more consideration about what people may have to undergo in the globalised era.
Pronouns and alliterations– Lamy’s use of pronouns is balanced and relevant throughout the speech. He however avoids alliteration in his speech with the closest evidence being in the phrase “sometimes similar, sometimes very different from one place to another” (Lamy).
Length– Lamy’s speech is long on generalities and short on specifics. His statement that people need to seek global solutions to counter globalization’s negative effects, imply that he does not have a good idea what these solutions might be.
Lamy’s style of language is formal, yet personal. His use of language makes the easy to listen to, and an even better reading piece. His forthright language is expected considering the specialized audience he addresses.
Specifically, Lamy seems to be addressing government officials, bureaucrats, think tanks, leaders of other international organizations and delegations from other nations. His avoidance of alliterations, too many idioms, or metaphors appears a deliberate action on his (or his speechwriter’s) part, intended to make the speech easy to hear and comprehend.
Lamy, Pascal DG. Humanizing Globalization. WTO News, 30 Jan. 2006. Web.
Speech in “Speaking ‘Like a Man’ in Teamsterville” by Gerry Philipsen Essay
Gerry Philipsen, who is commonly referred to as the father of The Speech Codes Theory, did an ethnographic analysis to establish the different meanings that are shared in a culture and he published his findings in the Quarterly Journal of Speech in an article entitled “Speaking ‘Like a Man’ in Teamsterville: Culture Patterns of Role Enactment in an Urban Neighborhood.”
For about three years, Philipsen interviewed the people of this community so that he could get the definition of speech codes. And after the successful research, he defined speech codes as forms of speech patterns that adhere to given rules and structures within a community of speakers.
Therefore, Speech Codes Theory strives to elucidate on the ethnography of communication since there are several cultures in the world, which have distinguishable set of communication patterns. In every special culture, speech codes, or rather the conversation itself, are stressed in different ways as illustrated by the study Philipsen performed in south Chicago involving the white males.
Philipsen study indicates that speech codes are found in every culture and they serve different purposes. The culture of a particular community states how its members can engage in a conversation. Philipsen notes that “cultures are not only varied but are also internally diverse in the emphasis they place on the value of talk” (13).
For developing a better understanding of individuals in a particular culture, knowing how their speech code is interpreted is of essence. Some cultures maintain the value of communication through conversation while others maintain that silence is more beneficial. “Each community has its own cultural values about speaking and these are linked to judgments of situational appropriateness” (Philipsen, 13).
In the study, which was based on a community he nicknamed the “Teamsterville,” Philipsen notes that “One manifestation of cultural outlook is the local view of the appropriateness of speaking versus other actional (such as silence, violence or non-verbal threats) strategies in male role enactment or self-presentation” (13).
The symbolic interaction in Teamsterville is valued most by the male figure since it is of essence for men in the community to assume the major responsibilities and cover certain boundaries so as to show that they are the dominant beings.
The understanding of this cultural pattern is that the men assume dominant status within the community. At Teamsterville, the importance of the reputation of men concerning their attributes is rated through their interaction with one another.
In addition to having a clear understanding of individuals, a strong cultural pattern in communication ought to maintain clarification of its values. The findings concerning the behavior of the inhabitants of Teamsterville reveal that its values were determined by the male sex.
“Whether and how well a man performs in a manly way is a principal criterion in Teamsterville for judging whether his behavior is appropriate and proper to the social identity ‘male’” (Philipsen, 13). The people held the belief that men were dominant in almost every way.
As illustrated in the article, a speech code is intended for a particular kind of people to understand. For the success of a conversation in Teamsterville, the participants should have similar identity characteristics such as “age, sex, ethnicity, occupational status, and location of residence” (Philipsen, 15).
In addition, they should have formed cordial relationship with one another for sometime. In the study, Philipsen noted that speaking is a dominant focus for all male social interaction in which the boys sat at the corner of the street while the men sat at the corner of the bar so as to engage themselves in a conversation.
Normally, the boys and the men have strategic places for sitting whereby speaking forms the dominant activity and outsiders are not invited or welcomed in such informal meetings. “Speech is the currency of social interaction when participants have similar social identities, including membership in a close-knit friendship group; speech purchases an expression of solidarity or assertion of status symmetry” (18).
“Speaking like a man in Teamsterville” provides a couple of instances in which speech patterns can be either appropriate or inappropriate. Essentially, the study found out that speaking is appropriate for expressing male dominance. However, it is not appropriate and it is not effective when it is used as a method of demonstrating power in interpersonal circumstances.
Philipsen came to understand and observed that the use of speech depends on a number of circumstances. In the eyes of Teamsterville residents, the use of speech is appropriate when a man is engaging in a conversation with another man who is seen as his peer. Typically, the participants have to have similar attributes mentioned above. In this type of a situation, the participants usually engage themselves in heavy talks among them.
Talking is effective for the Teamsterville male when it is employed within the framework of an already thriving or a continuing association founded on personal ties. The conversation is encouraged by the strength of the already existing relationship. This is what functions as a reinforcement of that relationship.
For example, in a situation in which a member of the town’s group goes to visit another member of the group in his home and it happens that the guest abuses the mother of the boy whom he came to see. In such a circumstance, since the two boys normally hang out on the same corner in the street, the offended boy would talk to the guest to avoid such offensive statements and admit for the guilt, instead of beating him. In this type of a circumstance, talking is considered more appropriate.
Speaking is less appropriate for the Teamstervillers when the relationship is seen to be “asymmetrical’’ such as interactions between husband and wife, father and kid, and an employer and a worker. The least speech is employed when a man wants to exert dominance over another. For instance, in a situation in which a Teamsterville man was walking with his wife in the streets and another man knowingly abused the wife.
Because of the need to assert power over another person, the man would resort to physical violence and beat the man who had abused his wife. A man attempting to “sweet” talk the other in order to be forgiven is regarded as a “homosexual.” In Teamsterville speech code, such an attempt to persuade the other for favours was considered immoral. Therefore, in this “power” situation, the use of talking is the least suitable.
Other similar instances include when a man wants to exert influence over another with a lower status and when a man maintains his position concerning issues such as politics or economics. In these ways, the speech code was designed in such a way that it could include some people and exclude other members of the town.
The use of the code created various problems for users. Some users misinterpreted the code and misused it. For example, a number of boys in the town refused to give Philipsen audience simply because he was not talking in a manly manner.
In another instance, a settlement group worker took a group of boys on a trip and when he did not give them a convincing answer concerning a question they asked him on how he would treat a person who has insulted his wife, the boys suddenly made a decision to go back home and forfeit the trip. These instances show that the residents of Teamsterville misused the code without any clear logical reason.
However, despite the problems of the code, it was especially good in a number of ways. The implementation of the code in Teamsterville tied together the ideas of the people, clarified their values, and resulted in commonality of the lifestyle in the town. Engaging in a conversation through either verbal or non-verbal means is an important aspect of life.
Speech code was an essential aspect of the culture of the residents of Teamsterville since it bound them together in a unique way that other cultures or societies were not able to relate to comfortably. Communication establishes a guide for
interpretation of thoughts as well as the free will that an individual requires so as to communicate freely with the rest of the world. This implies that the uniqueness of the society at Teamsterville could probably be non-existent if speech codes were not present. In conclusion, the study, as a descriptive datum, illustrates that talking can carry different functional loads within the communicative economies of different societies and that communication aspects in these societies are culturally diverse.
Philipsen, Gerry. “Speaking “like a man” in Teamsterville: Culture patterns of role enactment in an urban neighborhood.” Quarterly Journal of Speech 61.2 (1975). 13-21. Print.
Boy 1: (hanging out with the other boys at the corner of a street) My mum is not feeling well, she has been sick since last month, could you guys come so that you can see her, perhaps this will boost her health.
Boy 2: (After an extended period of time in which no one seems to take interest of the invitation) I will come after taking care of some errands in the home.
Boy 1: (Leaves the meeting place and rushes home) Bye everyone, I hope to see you at home, my mum will be very jubilant to my friend coming to see her.
Boy2: I promise to come. (He then shows up later at the home of his friend).
Boy 1: Welcome home, friend, I am pleased to have you here.
Boy 2: It is my pleasure to be here, so where is your ever-sick mum, I wonder why these old people always get sick!
Boy 1: (Assuming the negative remarks) She is at the bedroom, she has been sleeping since morning.
Boy 2: Still sleeping? I thought she was awake now, that is why the disease has never left her. You should tell your mum to stop behaving like that.
Boy 1: (Infuriated) Stop it! She is my mother; refer to her with some respect.
Boy 2: I am sorry for offending you, I though we were having another street talk.
Boy 1: It is okay. Let me now call her so that you can see her.
Free Speech /First Amendment Essay (Critical Writing)
There were times when people would be imprisoned for speaking out their minds. Speech is one form of communication of thought, ideas and beliefs. Without the freedom of speech people can be forced to accept things that are stated by the society.
In England for instance, during the 16th century Henry VII was taken to prison for speaking his mind, at the time it was a crime that was punishable by death. Freedom of speech allows personal ideas to be expressed freely; more so the freedom of speech in the United States governed by the first amendment of the constitution other than communication also covers public acts like parades demonstration, artist expressions and pickets.
First Amendment in the United States constitution protects the freedom of speech (Tedford 123). Government condemnation and advocacy ideas that are not popular which people find without taste and against public policy for example racism and chauvinism are always unacceptable.
Child pornography laws, Miller test for obscenity and speeches that may result to lawless actions are some of the exceptions in the general protection. In these areas there are limitations of free speech and other rights like rights of inventor and authors over their copyright. In US a graduated system is followed in regulating freedom of speech. In the First Amendment diverse types of regulation are subject to analysis in court challenges.
Types of Speeches
There are different types of speeches; the first is core political speech the most guarded form due to its communicative nature and its function to a republic that is functional (Mike 65). It is a speech about political issues and ideas that are not motivated by profit; the restrictions in this kind of speech must be well analyzed or else they can be struck down. Another kind of speech is commercial speech, in this kind it is not wholly protected although it is regulated by the state (Mike).
There are some exceptions to freedom of expression. Many of these have been identified by the court and in many cases without controversy. Courts justified them as speeches which could harm the public or speeches that the fore fathers had no intention of protecting or just customs that had been part of common law tradition from England where the American legal system is derived.
Obscenity is one of the exceptions, according to the US Miller Test, obscenity is a test used by Supreme Court to determine if an expression or a speech can be termed obscene and whether it can be protected by the first amendment of the constitution (Tedford 124). This is speech that describes sexual conduct in very offensive way and it can also be described as pornography.
Defamation is another exception and consists of publication of report of a fact that is untrue and can harm the reputation of another person. The freedom of expression has restrictions where ones expressions can harm the reputation of another person. An allegation of fact is a requirement in defamation that is false while the expression of an opinion is not defamation.
Right to pornography
This topic on pornography has had a lot of discussions in the United States for many years. For people would want the legislation to regulate it and would also like to have software that would filter it.
The greatest problem is that it is not easy to make laws that would go against it because by doing so someone would be challenging the first amendment. In any case so many issues have been raised that include claims that it demoralizes women and it’s filthy to be seen by the children. The main question is whether pornography is really harmful (Emerson). There are some reasons why the government finds it difficult to put restriction on pornography.
In social theory and in practice Emerson states that there is no enough reason as to why some people would find some material unpleasant and try to give restrictions on those materials (Emerson). In order to have restrictions on such materials there is need to have appropriate ground to make such laws so as to prevent the distribution of pornographic material because by looking at it from any perspective it is against the laws of free speech as outlined by the first amendment.
There is disagreement among traditional liberal defenders regarding discarding the principles of legal paternalism and legal moralism mostly in cases where people above eighteen year are concerned (Emerson). This does not mean that they approve obscenity they actually find it offensive and mindless.
Most people admit that the major function of pornography is to cause sexual arousal to viewers which can be regarded as low value speech. This is a speech that does not contribute anything that is artistic, intellectual, literal or of any political merit to the social and moral environment (Emerson).
On the contrary it does not mean that it need not be protected. It is strongly believed that mature and healthy adults are free to pursue their own pleasures privately and that the opinion of others on whether it is right or wrong to do so is intrusive or uncalled for. The implication is that what many find moral should not be allowed in law to hold back rebellious minority opinions so as to force their moral beliefs on others.
Today the first amendment that protects freedom of speech is viewed by many liberals as a fundamental right that cannot be regulated by government. But it is acceptable and expected for the State to intervene and regulate speech when it is used to cause harm.
There is no known way for determining the harm caused to others so as to justify what legal action that should be taken in case of such speech. To arrive at a decision whether or not to restrict speech in such a case, the nature and impact of harm caused is weighed against the interest of those involved (Emerson). This is then compared to the benefits and costs of an alternative policy that should be undertaken. If any speech goes against the interest of the majority of the public and its benefit minimal it should be restricted.
The first amendment is of great importance since without it, citizens in the US would not be given a chance by the US government to be heard. For democracy to change and grow the citizens should be allowed to voice their ideas. Without the first amendment there would be no words in music, it would also be difficult to print publications freely, there would be no going to groups and attending organizations and lastly everyone would belong to the same religion.
Without the first amendment US could be very corrupt since there would be no press which serves the function of a watchdog. This is because the five fundamental freedoms which are essential and accomplished through the amendment would not be possible.
Mike, Godwin. “Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age”. New York: Times Books. 1998. Print.
Tedford, Thomas. “Freedom of speech in the United States”. Carbondale: Southern Illinois, 1985. Print.
Emerson, Thomas . “Toward a General Theory of the First Amendment.”The Yale Law Journal Company, 14.2 (1963): 123-132.
Why Free Speech Is An Important Freedom Argumentative Essay
Freedom of speech is synonymous with freedom of expression. These two terms do not only explain the ability to speak or voice opinions without limitation or interference, but also the use of other means in communicating or impacting information.
This includes the use of expressions, music and art like painting, photography, and performing. In many countries, this freedom is provided for in as a basic freedom. Under the Universal Declaration of human rights in the United Nations there is a provision for this freedom. There are many genuine reasons why free speech is an important freedom.
Expressing oneself is a basic and important aspect of life and is also part of the basis for communication; it is more instinctive than learned. Throughout childhood and life, freedom of speech supports the learning of an individual through the acquisition of new views, ideas, concepts and theories in scientific, social and other fields of education.
One is able to participate in healthy debates and discussions, learn how to win and persuade in arguments and tolerate or even accept other people’s perceptions and ways of thinking. When an individual is able to express their ideas and opinions, it enables them to relate with others, participate in and enjoy interaction and bonding with other members of a group, team and community.
The main importance of speech learning and development is to facilitate expression and help an individual to live in harmony with other people in society, making sure that there needs are met and their rights, values and principles are not violated. Limiting or interfering with the freedom to speak and express oneself is a big violation of the basic rights of an individual and it restrains an individual from living a normal, productive and independent life.
Freedom of speech is an important aspect of social life in a civilized and democratic society. It enables people to make decisions on their rulers, systems of development and administration and initiate debates and discussions on important issues that concern public policy and governance.
People can voice their concerns over any problems or issues on accountability, responsibility and transparency of leadership. Freedom of speech is essential in the maintaining of law and order and making sure that there are checks and balances on individuals or groups which violate the law.
Although there has been debate on the justification of freedom of speech, it is important to realize that society cannot develop or advance when imparting of and access to information is impeded. In some instances privacy, control and protection of information is required but this does not mean that information should be completely barred from the public.
Freedom of expression is also important where social and cultural issues are concerned. When people are at liberty to express their opinions on critical issues concerning social values, norms and standards, social harmony and order is achieved.
In order to facilitate effective change which is inevitable, sensitive Issues concerning social life, like abortion, aesthesia, divorce, parenting, marriage etc. should be open to debate whether there is consensus or not. It is obviously clear that not all forms and means of freedom of expression that supported and defended but in order to prevent social tension and chaos people should be free to speak.
There are many reasons why free speech is an important freedom. Most societies agree that there should be clearly set guarantees on protecting and defending of this freedom without very little limitation except when it is very necessary and there has been general consensus on taking action against disbursement of information.
Argument Analyis of Racist Speech Analytical Essay
In his writing titled ‘on racist speech’, Charles. R. Lawrence III clearly portrays himself as a dissenter probably setting the tone for his argument. It is indeed clear that Lawrence’s opening remarks already indicate the contentious issue at hand. As a renowned scholar, Lawrence addresses racist speech especially within the university and campus environment. There is no doubt that racism is the catalyst for racist speech that is; a conspicuous but silent issue as Lawrence puts it on college and university campus.
Racist speech on campus
There is another angle to which Lawrence connotes racist speech. In introducing the rights as enshrined in the constitution, Lawrence’s intention is an attempt to qualify racist speech as a tenet within the constitution which guarantees freedom of speech. In his opening remarks, Lawrence proudly describes himself as a dissenter yet a consumer of the first amendment which also legally qualifies and legalizes his argument.
However, as Lawrence advances in his argument “the problem has been framed as one in which the liberty of free speech is in conflict with the elimination of racist speech” (61). It is indeed evident as the writing advances on that, the law and scholar contributions have so far been ineffective in providing protection to blacks and other minorities; as guaranteed in the constitution.
A case of segregated education system is the point of reference by Lawrence and the Brown versus Board of education case is used by Lawrence to amplify the conflict that exists between the first amendment and the racist speech. Lawrence’s opinion is that, the constitution remains lenient in as far as racist speech is concerned.
The contention as Lawrence asserts is that on one hand “we understand the necessity of eliminating the system of signs and symbols that signal inferiority of blacks … proclaiming that all racist speech that stops short of physical violence must be defended”(62). The tug of war in Lawrence’s mind is even clearer in his assertion that, “the Supreme court has held that words which ‘by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of peace’ are not prohibited by the first amendment” (62).
However, on the other hand the first amendment gives leeway to colossal amount of speech which includes racist speech. While the case of Brown versus Board of Education on segregated system of education is worth revisiting. Lawrence points out that, “courts have held that offensive speech may not be regulated in public forums” (62).
Ironically the effect this has for example on the university campus is that minorities or blacks will confine themselves to common rooms or locations where they do not encounter racist speech. However, this silently promotes segregation on ground of race where one will now go to common rooms with people of the same race or minorities on campus.
Lawrence’s dilemma advances is based on “commonly advanced argument against the regulation of racist speech…we recognize that minority groups suffer pain and injury as a result of racist speech but we must allow this hate mongering for the benefit of the society as a whole” (63).
In his strongest assertion yet in this argument, Lawrence concurs that “there can be no meaningful discussion of how we should reconcile our commitment of equality and our commitment to free speech until it is acknowledged that there is a real harm inflicted by racist speech” (64).
As far as it goes, there is a delicate balance between first amendment and racist speech as Lawrence puts it. On the surface racist speech has far reaching detriment to the society and its promotion in the name of upholding the first amendment is a great irony.
Albeit freedom of speech is upheld constitutionally, tenets within the same law appear conflicting and therefore the racist speech issue remains far from over.
It is without a doubt that policy makers at the university level continue to grumble with this issue. However, the skew that results from the interpretation of the law invokes in Lawrence’s mind the need to “strike a balance against the regulation of racist speech” (64). The understanding here is that, the cost of this balance should not be borne by a few as it presently is the case.
The argument that racist speech should be handled in light with the first amendment leaves a lot at stake. Charles Lawrence has ingeniously considered this issue at the university and campus level though it generally covers the whole fabric of the society.
The initial conclusion to draw from this argument is that; racist speech will remain an emotive issue until a critical analysis of the present law is undertaken and amendments made. Lawrence proposes a dissenting stand to start with. This will be achieved through resistance of government regulation on speech.
As a reader I am fully persuaded that Lawrence’s argument was correct. This argument provokes a clear conclusion and also encourages everybody to re-think how democratic space has been used to ironically advance inequality.
Lawrence, Charles. “The debate over placing limits on racist speech must ignore the damage it does to victims.” Chronicles of Higher Education. Chroninicles, 1989. Web.
“I have a dream”. Speech Analysis Critical Essay
“I have a dream” speech was given by Martin Luther King on 28th August 1963. There was an audience of about 250,000 people at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington where the speech was given. This speech was mainly based on the freedom for the black’s referred to as Negros.
He was much concerned about the oppression and exploitation of the black Americans at that time and he wished that people would understand that they were all equal. Unfortunately, Martin Luther king was assassinated on 4th of April 1968 when he was thirty nine years old. However, Martin Luther king left a legacy and is remembered on Martin Luther King Day every year.
Significance of the Speech in the world today
In the course of delivering his speech, Martin Luther King said, “I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation” (King speeches 1). This statement as he said has remained in our times and this is what has been happening all over the world.
People are fighting for their freedom. He viewed it as an end to all oppression that was continuously being witnessed. This is a sign of new life of freedom and equality. Since he was a theologian, Martin Luther King addressed many injustices according to the Bible.
Martin Luther King was enlightened and was tired of seeing blacks being exploited. He saw that the blacks were enslaved by the whites and yet they were helping them. He said,
One hundred years later, the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely Island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. (Speech 1)
Today many people are being exploited because of their race, tribe and even their origin. Many are living in poverty in the midst of the rich. Martin Luther King had spoken about this in his speech. He regretted that even after the country got a constitution; it did not accomplish the purpose it was meant to accomplish: “This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (Speech 1).
This is a fact even in today’s society. Many countries have constitutions made up so as to bring about justice to the people. However, it is very unfortunate because many people are experiencing injustice in form of labor, race and tribe.
Martin Luther King said that, “It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment” (Speech 1). This signifies that it was a matter that needed to be addressed in urgency; otherwise it would bring great destruction to the society at large. The same applies to the world today.
If nations do not put away their differences it may lead to great losses to many people, for instance the mass killings which were witnessed in Rwanda, Yugoslavia and even currently the conflicts in the Middle East are consequences of injustices not being addressed urgently (United Human Rights Council 1).
Martin Luther King said, that he had a dream, that every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low meaning that he hoped for a future with equality. This is believed to have become the reality of the dream when, black American Barack Obama became the president of America.
Criticism of the Speech
Although the speech is of great significance in our society today critics say that King was excessively rhetorical and that he did not provide a way to solve the many problems he addressed. Others say that some of his work in his doctoral dissertation was plagiarized. This was followed by other responses that disagreed with the statement and said that it had nothing to do with his contribution in the civil rights movement (E-notes 1).
Martin Luther King’s Speech remains important in the modern society. It consists of well founded goals which if well addressed will take many countries up the ladder. However, critics will always be there to search for the wrongs.
E-notes. Martin Luther King, Jr. 1929-1968. E-NOTES, 2011. Web.
King speeches. Martin Luther King Jr-I have a Dream speech. Writers Reviews, 2011. Web.
Speech. The I Have a Dream Speech Analysis. Speech topics Help, Advice & Ideas, 2011. Web.
United Human Rights Council. Genocide in Rwanda. United Human Rights Council, 2011. Web.