Journal #4

Freedom of Speech - Should there be limits to this constitutional guarantee?

Everybody has the right to freedom of speech. This allows people to state their own opinions on any certain subject. Although it is an individual's right, there should also be respect towards others. In Canada, it can be a crime to say offensive and negative cthings towards a specific race, sex, age, religion, ethnic origin, etc. Therefore, there should be limits and certain extents to freedom of speech.

To start off, there should be rules concerning freedom of speech because foolish remarks can be said. For that reason, people may take unwelcome comments more offensively than it should be. For instance, racist opinions may hurt the group of people that it was presented towards. If certain individuals say unnecessary things, discrimination and prejudice levels would always increase. Regardless of the negative aspects towards freedom of speech, there are also positive aspects to it. People can say and express feelings or beliefs on a unquestionable matter. An example of this would be an individual expressing feelings towards something. A relationship can be protected, (girlfriend-boyfriend relationship), if the truth is let out with freedom of speech. In addition, freedom of speech would assist in solving conflicts or problems either in a small community, or even a developed country. There are both pros and cons towards freedom of speech but, having limits would also benefit others.

In conclusion, although there are negative and positive sides on freedom of speech, there should be a certain extent to where freedom of speech can go to. Individuals should have freedom of speech to express their own ideas, but they should do so in a decisive manner. By allowing freedom of speech with limits, remarks that are not needed wouldn't be said and it would be assisting everybody in one way or another.

Journal #3

Write a three-paragraph blog post in which you argue for against the following statement:
"It was the mother's responsability to intervene in her daughter's life as she did."
In your post, you should express your personal point of view and provide strong arguments to support it. Include specific references from the story.

In the story, "Wilhelm," written by Gabrielle Roy, the mother of the story intervenes with the main character's life. Although mothers should always be alert to their daughter or son's life, sometimes, individuals just need their own space. The mother in this story decides to bud her way through her daughter's love life. Mothers know they have the freedom to do whatever it takes to take care of their own.

Gabrielle Roy creates a character in this story named Maman who is displayed as a prejudiced women. Ever since the beginning of the book, she was against her daughter dating Wilhelm because he was an immigrant. There was direct evidence in the text that proved that the mother was prejudiced. She was never considerate about what her daughter felt for him. "Who is that great beanstalk?" asked Maman. The daughter explained every spectacular thing he has done for her, yet she wasn't slightly impressed. So, before meeting Wilhelm, she came to a conclusion that she wasn't allowing her daughter to see Wilhelm ever again. She instantly "forbade me to see him." Despite her mother's decision about Wilhelm, she disobeyed her rules and never gave up meeting up with him. At once, it has been established that the relationship between the mother and daughter was slightly ruined. "But Wilhelm was clever. One or two days each week he finished work early; on those days he waited for me at the convent door," explained the daughter. That suitor of the daughter never gave up. Although the mother continued to forbid her daughter, they came up with new ways to reunite. Up until the end of the story, the mother repeatedly continued to ban her daughter from seeing Wilhelm and the couple continuously thought of new ideas to gather. When Wilhelm retured back to Holland, her mother finally then appreciated him.

Although what Maman did to her daughter throughout the book put her into misery, Maman did the right thing. She did whatever it took to show that her daughter deserved something better or maybe just someone else that linked with her daughter's personality better. Therefore, in conclusion, the mother had the reasons and right to do what she did and to also protect her young one.