# data[].attributes.body
I believe that the freedom of speech is a privilege during wartime, as if you are within a country during wartime and speaking against it, they have the right to be wary of your allegiance

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that every American has the right to the freedom of speech. However, people use it to their advantage by bashing government officals or the government itself. One must posses moral values and think before saying anything. Shneck did not violate the espionage because he was just voicing his opinion.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that everyone living in the United States is entitled to freedom of speech. Although some things may be said that influence bad reactions, these results are what comes with being an American. We should have the freedom to voice our opinions, and that means that some opinions may not be liked by others. Also, some may abuse this right by saying negative, problem causing things, however that doesn’t mean freedom of speech should be abolished or adjusted.

# data[].attributes.body
Nothing or no one is ever truly free. There are always some sort of rules and regulations that keep a situation in order. With freedom of speech there is a limit, if there is a public piece of writing that is circulating with a harmful message and threats the freedom of speech is taken away to protect the public. This applies especially during time of war.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes however that if ABSOLUTE free speech is granted to all at all times, that could indeed bring chaos, havoc, and disarray. This would happen due to radical people gaining power through speech and then using this power, which they have earned through corruption, to overthrown a power or political party. A prime example of this would be Rasputin's control over the Royal Russian family. I believe there has to be some type of boundaries to prevent these radical powers for growing too much, which luckily there is currently in America. We do have free speech but at the same time, it is illegal to scream fire in a theater or an yell bomb in a crowd. I do believe that Schenck violated the Espionage Act because he did indeed interfere with the military operations, this time being drafting, all though he did have some free right as an American citizen.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes one may have a right to free speech but an absolute free speech may cause problems throughout society and the government, such as hate speech. No, Schenk did not violate the espionage act, he was just trying to prove that Americans have rights that should be granted to them and the draft went against our rights.

# data[].attributes.body
No, you only have the right to freedom of speech to express yourself but once those words turn into hate speech then your right for freedom of speech should be revoked.

# data[].attributes.body
Americans do have a right to free speech. However, Americans do not have a right to execute free speech and then not receive consequences for their actions. Schenk did not violate the Espionage Act as he was simply stating the act went against our Constitutional Rights.

# data[].attributes.body
No, Americans do not have absolute freedom of speech. We as Americans do have freedom of speech, but not everything we say is “free” because our speech is limited to the context of our words. No, Schenck did violate the espionage act, he was simply stating that Americans have rights that should be granted to them. Schenck was just trying to prove that the draft completely went against our rights and that we as Americans should stand up for our rights.

# data[].attributes.body
In a free society such as ours, freedom is relative, not absolute.  We all have rights and freedoms as long as they do not deprive other’s rights and freedoms.  While everyone has the freedom of speech, no one has 100% absolute freedom of speech.  For example, a student who is angry at a teacher or an institution and starts spitting out profanity, he/she will be ejected from the classroom or the school premise.  His/her constitutional right to free speech does not give him/her the license to offend or bully another person’s basic freedoms such as a belief system.  In Schenck’s court case, he appealed to the draftees’ freedom of will, backing his claim with the Thirteenth Amendment.  I think Schenck did not violate the espionage act because his call to attention was a mere reflection of one’s decision, desires, and rights rather than a violent act.  Therefore, Schenck had the right to free speech, but on the condition that it does not instigate a clear and present danger against the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
You do not have an absolute right to free speech. Sometimes things are said in order to disrupt peace or to stop necessary action. Whilst it is important to be able to speak your mind, you must do so in a way that could not cause the country to be impacted negatively by it. Even though Schenck was convicted of violation the Espionage Act of 1917, his paper was not created to cause the United States to be negatively impacted, nor was it negatively impacted after its publication. As stated in the text, a mere six months later the justice who wrote the guidelines to the limitations of freedom of speech modified his interpretation of the clear and danger standard to be for only immediate danger. Schenck did not put the U.S. in immediate danger, and therefore should not have been convicted of this felony.

# data[].attributes.body
As a nation that advocates for freedom of speech, and will do any action to protect this freedom is slightly hypocritical. Yes, there is the the statement that during war times things are different, and yes that is correct. When proclaiming that the U.S is a place that allows you to voice your thoughts and opinions that is absolutely incorrect. There are restrictions place especially during war time, as it seems the U.S fears that soldiers and citizens will lose interest. Which slightly makes sense, but is it harming any citizen, no then why hinder ones speech. As for opinions swaying, if citizens fully place themselves in the war and on csn just create propaganda to keep these opinions to those mind of citizens that wish to involve themselves in war.  Does the Espionage Act violate American's Constitutional rights, yes it does. The government is one going against the well bieng of the people to accomplish there own agenda, and two there is already a set law that allows us to vocally express ourselves the brands form a pas t government which goes against the people in order to fulfill their own ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
As Americans we do not have an absolute right to free speech, rather our free speech is conditional and the context behind it depends on the legality of our rights. Our free speech is limited in instances that would cause harm to others. Such as being in a crowded building and shouting “fire”, doing so would cause people in the building to rush out possibly injuring people in the process. In the case of Schenck v. United States, it was ruled that Schenck violated the Espionage Act and was not covered by the First Amendment. His flyer that fought against the draft for World War I was protected by the First Amendment as it diminished the integrity of the United States in a time where Americans had to unite together. This case led to the addition of “Clear and Present Danger” since Schenck’s flyer would incite danger to the United States in a time of war. Overall Americans have free speech but it has it limits being that if danger would come as a result one is not covered by the First Amendment.

# data[].attributes.body
The first fundamental right given to the American people is the right to free speech. It is one's own decision how they decide to exercise their right. Although not written, there are certain things that should not be said, such as shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded room. Just as it was not in Schenck's best interest to write and publish media that was against America and the war. Schenck did violate the Espionage Act due to his publications that disagreed and advocated against America.

# data[].attributes.body
We as Americans have the right to freedom of speech, but the freedom is limited. We cannot say anything that would injure or cause harm to others. In the case of Schenck, he did violate the Espionage Act because it prohibits anyone from interfering and being disloyal to the government and military. During World War I a draft was necessary; desperate times call for desperate measures.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that I do have complete free speech. Since America was founded on the idea of standing up and speaking out against what is unfair, it only makes sense that as citizens we are allowed to speak our minds. However, the climate of America during World War I was a special situation. When the Zimmerman Telegram was discovered, the government realized that if we did not stick together and defend our nation, then we could lose all we had worked for. The Espionage Act said that people would be fined or jailed if they were vocal about being disloyal to the U.S. I believe that that act was a little extreme, but necessary during the war. We could not risk losing our very new nation, and anyone who tried to stop that was a threat. Schneck was kind of treated unfairly, however. He was not speaking out against America as a country or American ideals, he was just understandably upset with the draft.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that each and every American is entitled to free speech. However, I believe it is upon us to use it wisely and in a smart manner, to an extent whereas not to cause conflict with government. It is a right that every American should treasure and respect. In Schenck's situation, he did unfortunately violate the Espionage Act because he told men to resist from being drafted into the military affected the size, power, and control of the government and military. At this certain time, American military was much needed, and Schenck had no reason to tell people to not enlist in the army because it was in a time of crisis and they really needed the more people.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that one’s freedom of speech should be treasured and having this freedom is one of the many things that makes the US so special. However, there is always limitations to anything and everything, therefore not having an absolute freedom of speech. If one is using that 1st amendment to validate the screaming of “Fire!” in a theatre, that is not applicable since one is abusing their rights to potentially harm others. In Schenck’s case of demoting the draft, it did violate the Espionage Act since it was evidently unsupportive of the US government’s decision during a time of war. Yet despite the Act, Shenck’s pamphlets should have been protected by the first amendment seeing as this form of free speech is not harming anyone, simply expressing and educating others on his opinion.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion, I feel that we have an absolute right to free speech. With this type of free speech, we will have regulations depending on what we say/do, but as an American I feel that we have an absolute right to free speech. We should be able to speak our minds freely about issues that effect the people. I do think that Schenck violated the Espionage Act. The Espionage Act imposed harsh penalties to those who spoke or acted against the government or military.  When Schenck passed out the leaflets urging others to resist the draft, he technically crossed the line and violated the parameters of the Espionage Act.  This case on its own was very controversial because people may say that the Espionage Act may violate the right to free speech as it prohibits talk about our government.  I also believe that the ruling in this case may be somewhat unjust but since Schenck broke the rules of the Espionage Act, the proper action may have taken place.

# data[].attributes.body
Although our right is listed as freedom of speech, the amount of freedom we have is regulated by the government. You can say what you want as long as the government agrees. Schenck did go against the Espionage Act because he wanted drafted men to resist the draft. This is interfering with the U.S. military because the drafted men are now serving under the military. If they resist, refuse, or leave it could be considered desertion and the man could face serious consequences.

# data[].attributes.body
Absolute freedom of speech is a stretch. In times of conflict the government wants everyone to agree or at least get along. Propaganda makes people divide in certain ways that go against the government. People do have the first amendment rights pertaining to freedom of speech. However, the government has put into effect the Espionage Act tries to hinder the freedom of speech by Americans that vocally oppose the United States government, the constitution, or the military. Therefore, Schenck went against the Espionage Act by sending out letters going against the Government and Armed forces.

# data[].attributes.body
In the United States in times of war, citizens do not have an absolute rights to free speech. This is due to the legislature like the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act. People should, however, always be granted their first amendment rights. If the Constitution is only the 'Supreme Law of the Land' when it is convenient for the government, there is no point in holding the document to such an esteem. If a country must abandon the practice of such a basic right to win a war against tyranny, they themselves become no better than the enemy country. Regardless of whether or not the Espionage Act is Constitutional, Schenck was not advocating direct rebellion against the draft, but rather exposing conscripted men to the idea that they should not have to forfeit their rights and be forced to serve in the military if they did not want. For this reason, he should have been acquitted of the charges against him under the ruling that there was no clear and immediate danger from his actions.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion yes I think that we have an absolute right to free speech to a certain extent. If someone's speech is towards hurting people, then I believe legal action should be taken. No, I do not believe Schenck violated the espionage act. Freedom of speech is the idea that people can voice their opinions without being punished. Schenck used this amendment to prove that there were ways to avoid the draft. He did not do so in a violent or inhumane manner, he simply wrote a letter to show that the draft was not inevitable.

# data[].attributes.headline
Do you have an ABSOLUTE right to Free Speech? Did Schenck violate the espionage act? Why or Why Not?

# data[].attributes.subject
Do you have an ABSOLUTE right to Free Speech? Did Schenck violate the espionage act? Why or Why Not?

# data[].attributes.body
Yes people should have an absolute right to free speech. Free speech allows people to express themselves and to hold their own opinions. Freedom of speech is one of the amendments and shouldn't be taken away because that is equivalent of taking away the citizens voice. Technically speaking yes Schenck did violate the Espoinage Act due to his act of sending out a letter urging resistance to the the military draft since in the Espoinage Act it specifically states that jail time and fines will be issued if anyone is to interfere with the military and cause disloyalty to the military.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, we have an absolute right to free speech. Not having the freedom of speech goes against the constitution, which is the supreme law of land. If one isn’t using their freedom of speech right, they are helping to deny rights of the American people.
No Schenck did not violate the Espionage Act. Schenck urged readers to assert their rights however did not encourage violence or envasionnof consription laws. Writings the letter also did not violate the Espionage Act because they were opinions about the war which many other socialists and politicians had; including the senate and house of representatives members who voted against going to war