I interviewed six people, three from my generation and three from the older generation. I asked them the following question: Would you approve of a law saying “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” if congress were considering it?Â
The younger generation:
Anndee Greenlee:
The first person I talked to was my friend Anndee, a nineteen-year-old at the University of Texas Tech. When I asked her if she would approve of the law, she said yes automatically. When I asked if she thought it was excessive, she said no because “everyone has a right to speak their mind”. When I asked her if she recognized the law as the first amendment, she said she did. This checks out because I and Anndee were in the same 8th-grade history class and had it drilled into our heads by an amazing teacher who recognized its importance.
Jake Elliott:
The next person I interviewed was my brother, Jake Elliott who is a junior at the University of Oklahoma. When I asked him if he would approve of the law, he said “yeah probably”. Well, actually he told me, “Isn’t that just the first amendment?” but I digress. I asked him if he thought it was excessive in any way and he said no. He stated that “it was something to be defended”. I then asked if he recognized the law as the first amendment, and he said that he did in fact recognize it.
Trevor Whal:
Next, I interviewed Trevor Whal, who is a member of the NORTC and a junior at the University of Oklahoma. When asked if he would approve of the law he said, “Ma’am isn’t that just the first amendment?”. I asked him to tell me his thoughts on it anyway and he said that he definitely approved of it. When I asked him if he thought it was excessive in any way or offered too much freedom, he said “not at all”. He then added that if he had to pick someone that it gave too much freedom to it would be the press, due to the fact that they have the ability to just publish false information, but he also said that he understands that it is their right to do so. I asked him if he was aware that this was the first amendment and he was yes, that he was definitely aware of that.
Next, the older generation:
Shon Elliott:
Shon Elliott is my father. I asked him if he would approve of the following law and he said “hell yeah brother”. This a very in-character response from the man that raised me. I asked him if he thought it was excessive in any way or allowed for too much freedom. To this, he said, “No I don’t. That is the reason we have the right to say what we want to say”. I asked him if he was aware that this was the first amendment and he told me that he was aware.
LaDonna Elliott:
LaDonna Elliott is my mother and one of the smartest women I have ever met. When I asked her about the law and how she would feel about it. She told me that she approved of it without a doubt. I asked her if she thought any of it was excessive or allowed for too much freedom. She said, “No I don’t. We should have the right to freedom”. I then asked her if she was aware that this was the first amendment to which she informed me that she was indeed aware. She then added that “The first amendment is something that gives us Americans a right that we often take for granted. We have the right to freedom of speech and to say the things we want and to disagree with the government. We’re lucky to live somewhere that allows that”.
Debby Rhines:
Debby Rhines is my mom’s sorority sister and someone I look up to very much. I asked her if she would approve of the law if congress were to pass it. To this, she said that she definitely approved of it. She said that “it was necessary”. I asked her if any of it seemed excessive to her in any way. She told me no, and that it was again a necessity. I asked her if she was aware that this was the first amendment and she told me that she was aware of that fact.Â
Analysis:
As I interviewed these people, I was not shocked at all to find that the younger generation recognized the law just as much as the older generation. I also noticed that everyone agreed with the first amendment, another thing that didn’t surprise me. One thing that I did find interesting was just how passionate everyone seemed to be about it. No matter who I asked, their support of the law was clear and evident.Â
Interpretation:
Everyone I talked to was in support of the first amendment. Their reasons all boiled down to the same theme of “because it’s important”. They all believed that freedoms of speech, assembly, the press, religion, and petition were all a necessity for our lives as citizens of the United States.Â
Evaluation:
Some people may be shocked at the fact that the younger generation recognizes the law just as well as the older generation, but I’m not. My generation has never known a world of peace. We were born into a post-9/11 society and since then it’s been one thing after another. We are very aware of the importance of our rights and the extreme importance of our first amendment rights. I was impressed by just how passionate everyone seemed about the first amendment. In today’s world, there tends to be a bad habit of being uncaring towards our rights as Americans, so it was nice to see that people do indeed care.Â
Engagement:
The recent national survey on students’ opinions of the first amendment is a bit concerning. To hear that some think that the first amendment goes, “too far in the rights it guarantees” makes me wonder if people from other countries would feel the same way. In countries where people are killed for speaking their minds, would they agree that our counties laws go too far?Â
