PLS Important, 2 questions

Law

2 answers:

Mama L [17]3 years ago

8 0

Answer:

3 basic rights.

1.Religious freedom

2. Freedom of speach

3. Freedom of the press

Explanation:

All of our rights even inalianable rights come with limits.

The only right that has no limits is the freedom of thought which is the same as religious freedom. You have the right to think and believe anything. But even that has restrictions on how you can act on your beliefs. Your religious beliefs are not a license to do anything related to that belief. You can't engage in human sacrifice as a ritual for the belief. You can't hide behind your religous beliefs as a sheild against prosecution for murder.

"Freedom of religion embraces two concepts, -freedom to believe and freedom to act. The first is absolute, but in the nature of things the second cannot be. ~ <em>Cantwell v Connecticut.</em>

<em />

The freedom of speach also has limits. You can say anything but you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. Doing so could cause a stampede and endanger the lives of others. Likewise, we have an impeachment case before the Senate right now in which the former president incited a riot at the Capital complex that caused the death of 6 people. The question before the Senate is did the former President incite a riot causing death and destruction of public property?

The freedom of the press is a first amendment right. But that doesn't give a publisher the right to slander or print falsehood about another person. The freedom of assembly is another 1st amendment right, but there is a difference between a lawful and peaceful assembly and a riot that results in the death of 5 people and the destruction of property.

g100num [7]3 years ago

8 0

1. freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom to peaceably assemble and to petition the government.

2.some rights may have to be limited because of the potential adverse impact that the abuse of such rights could have on society at large or on the rights of others for example the right to freedom of speech may in many instances legitimately be restricted to prevent harassment of others

You might be interested in

Suppose an individual has told friends that he knows his phone has been tapped. Yet, when he appeals conviction based on informa

LUCKY_DIMON [66]

The supreme court ruled in Katz vs United States expands the fourth amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures to cover electronic wiretaps.

Explanation:

Katz found guilty because of illegal gambling and the appellate court found that there was no physical intrusion into the phone booth and there was no need for warrant.

The supreme court uses a wiretap to intercept a private telephone conversation and was not a search for fourth amendment.

The majority opinion of Katz vs United States had overturned the court of appeals affirmation of the conviction.

The fourth amendment is the bill of rights of constitution that protects people from unlawful searches and occupation.

3 0

4 years ago

Growing up in a rough neighborhood, Xavier learned to hotwire cars in order to get them started. He and his friends would look f

anygoal [31]

Answer:

professional thief

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago