Answer:
Outline:
- What is freedom of expression.
- The problems of limiting that freedom.
- The need to know how to differentiate between freedom of expression and oppression and intolerance.
- Conclusion.
Explanation:
Freedom of expression is the permission of people to speak their opinions and to position themselves on other people's opinions without suffering any reprisals from anyone. Freedom of expression is a right defended by the first constitutional amendment, in addition to being a humanitarian right that must be respected by all.
Limiting or punishing freedom of expression, therefore, is a negative thing, as it limits the population of the truth, in addition to limiting rationality, questioning and the ability of human beings to think for themselves and show their thoughts. In this case, the punishment of freedom of expression is something tyrannical and should not be promoted in any case and at any time, regardless of what it is.
However, for the population to have free freedom of expression, it is necessary that first, the population knows how to differentiate what is freedom of expression and what is oppression and intolerance. This is because many people use the right to freedom of expression to offend, be prejudiced and hide the hatred of population groups. This is harmful and does not add anything good in the world.
Therefore, we can conclude that punishing freedom of expression is negative for the population, however, it is important that the population is taught about what is opinion and what is hate speech and intolerance.
Government has come out with a new headline-will benefit woman employed in army their posting will close totheir home town. Many women employed with the forces will ensure better working conditions for the women personnel 10,000 women will be recruited in army in near future B) Imagine you are a newspaper reporter. Use the clues given below to write a report on the provision of a new privilege for woman employed in Army. Select a suitable headline for you report.
Answer:
Henry Louis Gates, Jr. was a highly educated writer. He wrote the essay called "In the Kitchen". In the script, he talks about his mother doing hair in the kitchen. The "kitchen" doesn't actually refer to a kitchen where someone would cook food. The "kitchen" is the area on the back of the head where "our neck meets the shirt collar". As Gates goes on to say, no one nor thing could straighten the kitchen. Gates begins to describe a political significance to hair by speaking of the "good" and "bad" hair. Gates attitude towards the "kitchen" is quite negative as he does not like the politics of it. They [people in general] consider white hair good hair. He believes the "process" in which a man tries to straighten his hair is pointless as it will not fix the "kitchen". The process for trying to fix it is quite expensive. It is best to trim it all off the best you can. Gates uses Frederick Douglas and Nat King Cole as examples of famous African-Americans to argue, to his point, that even the most expensive or unorthodox way of trying to fix your "kitchen" simply does not work
