20 May 09:00 PM

Closed question
Question about English (US)

(If there are something unnatural or mistakes, please correct them!)
Freedom of speech is important, and we humans have historically made continuous efforts to obtain this right, and people still suffer from the oppression of this right in some countries. However, sometimes there should be restrictions to it, when human rights are violated, or public safety is threatened.
First, protecting basic human rights such as people's privacy should be prioritized. Sometimes we hear that news media, social media, or some other websites have reported the names or other personal information of criminal suspects, only to turn out to be no guilty. In those cases, exposed information can not be returned.
Second, scattering confidential information can be a potential thread to the public safety. Especially, military affairs are confidential, and we have to limit the amount of information and the timing of releasing information is crucial to protect public safety.
Finally, restriction to freedom of speech is required for protecting minority groups. Minority groups are easily damaged by public opinions of majority groups, such as hate speech. LGBT groups and ethnic minority people are likely to be targets to those hate speeches.
In conclusion, freedom of speech should sometimes be restricted when we have to protect human rights and public safety. We need to strike a good balance between freedom of speech and the protection of human rights.
does this sound natural?

Read more comments

English (US) Spanish (Mexico)

English (US)
Similar questions