freedom in america essay

‘Freedom’ Means Something Different to Liberals and Conservatives. Here’s How the Definition Split—And Why That Still Matters

W e tend to think of freedom as an emancipatory ideal—and with good reason. Throughout history, the desire to be free inspired countless marginalized groups to challenge the rule of political and economic elites. Liberty was the watchword of the Atlantic revolutionaries who, at the end of the 18th century, toppled autocratic kings, arrogant elites and ( in Haiti ) slaveholders, thus putting an end to the Old Regime. In the 19th and 20th centuries, Black civil rights activists and feminists fought for the expansion of democracy in the name of freedom, while populists and progressives struggled to put an end to the economic domination of workers.

While these groups had different objectives and ambitions, sometimes putting them at odds with one another, they all agreed that their main goal—freedom—required enhancing the people’s voice in government. When the late Rep. John Lewis called on Americans to “let freedom ring” , he was drawing on this tradition.

But there is another side to the story of freedom as well. Over the past 250 years, the cry for liberty has also been used by conservatives to defend elite interests. In their view, true freedom is not about collective control over government; it consists in the private enjoyment of one’s life and goods. From this perspective, preserving freedom has little to do with making government accountable to the people. Democratically elected majorities, conservatives point out, pose just as much, or even more of a threat to personal security and individual right—especially the right to property—as rapacious kings or greedy elites. This means that freedom can best be preserved by institutions that curb the power of those majorities, or simply by shrinking the sphere of government as much as possible.

This particular way of thinking about freedom was pioneered in the late 18th century by the defenders of the Old Regime. From the 1770s onward, as revolutionaries on both sides of the Atlantic rebelled in the name of liberty, a flood of pamphlets, treatises and newspaper articles appeared with titles such as Some Observations On Liberty , Civil Liberty Asserted or On the Liberty of the Citizen . Their authors vehemently denied that the Atlantic Revolutions would bring greater freedom. As, for instance, the Scottish philosopher Adam Ferguson—a staunch opponent of the American Revolution—explained, liberty consisted in the “security of our rights.” And from that perspective, the American colonists already were free, even though they lacked control over the way in which they were governed. As British subjects, they enjoyed “more security than was ever before enjoyed by any people.” This meant that the colonists’ liberty was best preserved by maintaining the status quo; their attempts to govern themselves could only end in anarchy and mob rule.

Get your history fix in one place: sign up for the weekly TIME History newsletter

In the course of the 19th century this view became widespread among European elites, who continued to vehemently oppose the advent of democracy. Benjamin Constant, one of Europe’s most celebrated political thinkers, rejected the example of the French revolutionaries, arguing that they had confused liberty with “participation in collective power.” Instead, freedom-lovers should look to the British constitution, where hierarchies were firmly entrenched. Here, Constant claimed, freedom, understood as “peaceful enjoyment and private independence,” was perfectly secure—even though less than five percent of British adults could vote. The Hungarian politician Józseph Eötvös, among many others, agreed. Writing in the wake of the brutally suppressed revolutions that rose against several European monarchies in 1848, he complained that the insurgents, battling for manhood suffrage, had confused liberty with “the principle of the people’s supremacy.” But such confusion could only lead to democratic despotism. True liberty—defined by Eötvös as respect for “well-earned rights”—could best be achieved by limiting state power as much as possible, not by democratization.

In the U.S., conservatives were likewise eager to claim that they, and they alone, were the true defenders of freedom. In the 1790s, some of the more extreme Federalists tried to counter the democratic gains of the preceding decade in the name of liberty. In the view of the staunch Federalist Noah Webster, for instance, it was a mistake to think that “to obtain liberty, and establish a free government, nothing was necessary but to get rid of kings, nobles, and priests.” To preserve true freedom—which Webster defined as the peaceful enjoyment of one’s life and property—popular power instead needed to be curbed, preferably by reserving the Senate for the wealthy. Yet such views were slower to gain traction in the United States than in Europe. To Webster’s dismay, overall, his contemporaries believed that freedom could best be preserved by extending democracy rather than by restricting popular control over government.

But by the end of the 19th century, conservative attempts to reclaim the concept of freedom did catch on. The abolition of slavery, rapid industrialization and mass migration from Europe expanded the agricultural and industrial working classes exponentially, as well as giving them greater political agency. This fueled increasing anxiety about popular government among American elites, who now began to claim that “mass democracy” posed a major threat to liberty, notably the right to property. Francis Parkman, scion of a powerful Boston family, was just one of a growing number of statesmen who raised doubts about the wisdom of universal suffrage, as “the masses of the nation … want equality more than they want liberty.”

William Graham Sumner, an influential Yale professor, likewise spoke for many when he warned of the advent of a new, democratic kind of despotism—a danger that could best be avoided by restricting the sphere of government as much as possible. “ Laissez faire ,” or, in blunt English, “mind your own business,” Sumner concluded, was “the doctrine of liberty.”

Being alert to this history can help us to understand why, today, people can use the same word—“freedom”—to mean two very different things. When conservative politicians like Rand Paul and advocacy groups FreedomWorks or the Federalist Society talk about their love of liberty, they usually mean something very different from civil rights activists like John Lewis—and from the revolutionaries, abolitionists and feminists in whose footsteps Lewis walked. Instead, they are channeling 19th century conservatives like Francis Parkman and William Graham Sumner, who believed that freedom is about protecting property rights—if need be, by obstructing democracy. Hundreds of years later, those two competing views of freedom remain largely unreconcilable.

Annelien de Dijn is the author of Freedom: An Unruly History , available now from Harvard University Press.

More Must-Reads From TIME

• Jane Fonda Champions Climate Action for Every Generation
• Passengers Are Flying up to 30 Hours to See Four Minutes of the Eclipse
• Biden’s Campaign Is In Trouble. Will the Turnaround Plan Work?
• Essay: The Complicated Dread of Early Spring
• Why Walking Isn’t Enough When It Comes to Exercise
• The Financial Influencers Women Actually Want to Listen To
• The Best TV Shows to Watch on Peacock
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

You May Also Like

Essays About Freedom: 5 Helpful Examples and 7 Prompts

Freedom seems simple at first; however, it is quite a nuanced topic at a closer glance. If you are writing essays about freedom, read our guide of essay examples and writing prompts.

In a world where we constantly hear about violence, oppression, and war, few things are more important than freedom. It is the ability to act, speak, or think what we want without being controlled or subjected. It can be considered the gateway to achieving our goals, as we can take the necessary steps. 

However, freedom is not always “doing whatever we want.” True freedom means to do what is righteous and reasonable, even if there is the option to do otherwise. Moreover, freedom must come with responsibility; this is why laws are in place to keep society orderly but not too micro-managed, to an extent.

5 Examples of Essays About Freedom

1. essay on “freedom” by pragati ghosh, 2. acceptance is freedom by edmund perry, 3. reflecting on the meaning of freedom by marquita herald.

• 4.  Authentic Freedom by Wilfred Carlson

5. What are freedom and liberty? by Yasmin Youssef

1. what is freedom, 2. freedom in the contemporary world, 3. is freedom “not free”, 4. moral and ethical issues concerning freedom, 5. freedom vs. security, 6. free speech and hate speech, 7. an experience of freedom.

“Freedom is non denial of our basic rights as humans. Some freedom is specific to the age group that we fall into. A child is free to be loved and cared by parents and other members of family and play around. So this nurturing may be the idea of freedom to a child. Living in a crime free society in safe surroundings may mean freedom to a bit grown up child.”

In her essay, Ghosh briefly describes what freedom means to her. It is the ability to live your life doing what you want. However, she writes that we must keep in mind the dignity and freedom of others. One cannot simply kill and steal from people in the name of freedom; it is not absolute. She also notes that different cultures and age groups have different notions of freedom. Freedom is a beautiful thing, but it must be exercised in moderation. 

“They demonstrate that true freedom is about being accepted, through the scenarios that Ambrose Flack has written for them to endure. In The Strangers That Came to Town, the Duvitches become truly free at the finale of the story. In our own lives, we must ask: what can we do to help others become truly free?”

Perry’s essay discusses freedom in the context of Ambrose Flack’s short story The Strangers That Came to Town : acceptance is the key to being free. When the immigrant Duvitch family moved into a new town, they were not accepted by the community and were deprived of the freedom to live without shame and ridicule. However, when some townspeople reach out, the Duvitches feel empowered and relieved and are no longer afraid to go out and be themselves. 

“Freedom is many things, but those issues that are often in the forefront of conversations these days include the freedom to choose, to be who you truly are, to express yourself and to live your life as you desire so long as you do not hurt or restrict the personal freedom of others. I’ve compiled a collection of powerful quotations on the meaning of freedom to share with you, and if there is a single unifying theme it is that we must remember at all times that, regardless of where you live, freedom is not carved in stone, nor does it come without a price.”

In her short essay, Herald contemplates on freedom and what it truly means. She embraces her freedom and uses it to live her life to the fullest and to teach those around her. She values freedom and closes her essay with a list of quotations on the meaning of freedom, all with something in common: freedom has a price. With our freedom, we must be responsible. You might also be interested in these essays about consumerism .

4.   Authentic Freedom by Wilfred Carlson

“Freedom demands of one, or rather obligates one to concern ourselves with the affairs of the world around us. If you look at the world around a human being, countries where freedom is lacking, the overall population is less concerned with their fellow man, then in a freer society. The same can be said of individuals, the more freedom a human being has, and the more responsible one acts to other, on the whole.”

Carlson writes about freedom from a more religious perspective, saying that it is a right given to us by God. However, authentic freedom is doing what is right and what will help others rather than simply doing what one wants. If freedom were exercised with “doing what we want” in mind, the world would be disorderly. True freedom requires us to care for others and work together to better society. 

“In my opinion, the concepts of freedom and liberty are what makes us moral human beings. They include individual capacities to think, reason, choose and value different situations. It also means taking individual responsibility for ourselves, our decisions and actions. It includes self-governance and self-determination in combination with critical thinking, respect, transparency and tolerance. We should let no stone unturned in the attempt to reach a state of full freedom and liberty, even if it seems unrealistic and utopic.”

Youssef’s essay describes the concepts of freedom and liberty and how they allow us to do what we want without harming others. She notes that respect for others does not always mean agreeing with them. We can disagree, but we should not use our freedom to infringe on that of the people around us. To her, freedom allows us to choose what is good, think critically, and innovate. 

7 Prompts for Essays About Freedom

Freedom is quite a broad topic and can mean different things to different people. For your essay, define freedom and explain what it means to you. For example, freedom could mean having the right to vote, the right to work, or the right to choose your path in life. Then, discuss how you exercise your freedom based on these definitions and views. 

The world as we know it is constantly changing, and so is the entire concept of freedom. Research the state of freedom in the world today and center your essay on the topic of modern freedom. For example, discuss freedom while still needing to work to pay bills and ask, “Can we truly be free when we cannot choose with the constraints of social norms?” You may compare your situation to the state of freedom in other countries and in the past if you wish. 

A common saying goes like this: “Freedom is not free.” Reflect on this quote and write your essay about what it means to you: how do you understand it? In addition, explain whether you believe it to be true or not, depending on your interpretation. 

Many contemporary issues exemplify both the pros and cons of freedom; for example, slavery shows the worst when freedom is taken away, while gun violence exposes the disadvantages of too much freedom. First, discuss one issue regarding freedom and briefly touch on its causes and effects. Then, be sure to explain how it relates to freedom. 

Some believe that more laws curtail the right to freedom and liberty. In contrast, others believe that freedom and regulation can coexist, saying that freedom must come with the responsibility to ensure a safe and orderly society. Take a stand on this issue and argue for your position, supporting your response with adequate details and credible sources. 

Many people, especially online, have used their freedom of speech to attack others based on race and gender, among other things. Many argue that hate speech is still free and should be protected, while others want it regulated. Is it infringing on freedom? You decide and be sure to support your answer adequately. Include a rebuttal of the opposing viewpoint for a more credible argumentative essay. 

For your essay, you can also reflect on a time you felt free. It could be your first time going out alone, moving into a new house, or even going to another country. How did it make you feel? Reflect on your feelings, particularly your sense of freedom, and explain them in detail. 

Check out our guide packed full of transition words for essays .If you are interested in learning more, check out our essay writing tips !

Martin is an avid writer specializing in editing and proofreading. He also enjoys literary analysis and writing about food and travel.

View all posts

• Search Menu
• About OAH Magazine of History
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• Figures and Tables
• < Previous

Freedom: America's Evolving and Enduring Idea

Eric Foner is DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University and a former president of the OAH. He is the author of numerous books, including Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men (1970); Reconstruction: America's Un. nished Revolution (1988); The Story of American Freedom (1998); and Who Owns History? (2002). His most recent publication is a survey textbook , Give Me Liberty!: An American History (2005) .

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Eric Foner, Freedom: America's Evolving and Enduring Idea, OAH Magazine of History , Volume 20, Issue 4, July 2006, Pages 9–11, https://doi.org/10.1093/maghis/20.4.9

• Permissions Icon Permissions

N o idea is more central to American identity—that is, Americans' conception of themselves as a people and a nation—than freedom. The central term in our political vocabulary, freedom—or liberty, with which it is almost always used interchangeably—is deeply embedded in the documentary record of our history and the language of everyday life. The Declaration of Independence lists liberty among mankind's inalienable rights; the Constitution announces as its purpose to secure liberty's blessings. The United States fought the Civil War to bring about a new birth of freedom, World War II for the Four Freedoms, the Cold War to defend the Free World. The current war in Iraq has been given the title “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” Americans' love of freedom has been represented by liberty poles, caps, and statues, and acted out by burning stamps and burning draft cards, running away from slavery, and demonstrating for the right to vote. Obviously, other peoples also cherish freedom, but the idea does seem to occupy a more prominent place in public and private discourse in the United States than elsewhere. “Every man in the street, white, black, red or yellow,” wrote the educator and statesman Ralph Bunche in 1940, “knows that this is ‘the land of the free’… [and] ‘the cradle of liberty’” ( 1).

Email alerts

Citing articles via, affiliations.

• Online ISSN 1938-2340
• Print ISSN 0882-228X
• Copyright © 2024 Organization of American Historians
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• History Classics
• Your Profile
• Find History on Facebook (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Twitter (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on YouTube (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on Instagram (Opens in a new window)
• Find History on TikTok (Opens in a new window)
• This Day In History
• History Podcasts
• History Vault

First Amendment

By: History.com Editors

Updated: July 27, 2023 | Original: December 4, 2017

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects the freedom of speech, religion and the press. It also protects the right to peaceful protest and to petition the government. The amendment was adopted in 1791 along with nine other amendments that make up the Bill of Rights—a written document protecting civil liberties under U.S. law. The meaning of the First Amendment has been the subject of continuing interpretation and dispute over the years. Landmark Supreme Court cases have dealt with the right of citizens to protest U.S. involvement in foreign wars, flag burning and the publication of classified government documents.

Bill of Rights

During the summer of 1787, a group of politicians, including James Madison and Alexander Hamilton , gathered in Philadelphia to draft a new U.S. Constitution .

Antifederalists, led by the first governor of Virginia , Patrick Henry , opposed the ratification of the Constitution. They felt the new constitution gave the federal government too much power at the expense of the states. They further argued that the Constitution lacked protections for people’s individual rights.

The debate over whether to ratify the Constitution in several states hinged on the adoption of a Bill of Rights that would safeguard basic civil rights under the law. Fearing defeat, pro-constitution politicians, called Federalists , promised a concession to the antifederalists—a Bill of Rights.

James Madison drafted most of the Bill of Rights. Madison was a Virginia representative who would later become the fourth president of the United States. He created the Bill of Rights during the 1st United States Congress, which met from 1789 to 1791 – the first two years that President George Washington was in office.

The Bill of Rights, which was introduced to Congress in 1789 and adopted on December 15, 1791, includes the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

First Amendment Text

The First Amendment text reads:

“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.”

While the First Amendment protected freedoms of speech, religion, press, assembly and petition, subsequent amendments under the Bill of Rights dealt with the protection of other American values including the Second Amendment right to bear arms and the Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury.

Freedom of Speech

The First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech . Freedom of speech gives Americans the right to express themselves without having to worry about government interference. It’s the most basic component of freedom of expression.

The U.S. Supreme Court often has struggled to determine what types of speech is protected. Legally, material labeled as obscene has historically been excluded from First Amendment protection, for example, but deciding what qualifies as obscene has been problematic. Speech provoking actions that would harm others—true incitement and/or threats—is also not protected, but again determining what words have qualified as true incitement has been decided on a case-by-case basis.

Freedom of the Press

This freedom is similar to freedom of speech, in that it allows people to express themselves through publication.

There are certain limits to freedom of the press . False or defamatory statements—called libel—aren’t protected under the First Amendment.

Freedom of Religion

The First Amendment, in guaranteeing freedom of religion , prohibits the government from establishing a “state” religion and from favoring one religion over any other.

While not explicitly stated, this amendment establishes the long-established separation of church and state.

Right to Assemble, Right to Petition

The First Amendment protects the freedom to peacefully assemble or gather together or associate with a group of people for social, economic, political or religious purposes. It also protects the right to protest the government.

The right to petition can mean signing a petition or even filing a lawsuit against the government.

First Amendment Court Cases

Here are landmark Supreme Court decisions related to the First Amendment.

Free Speech &  Freedom of the Press :

Schenck v. United States , 1919: In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Socialist Party activist Charles Schenck after he distributed fliers urging young men to dodge the draft during World War I .

The Schenck decision helped define limits of freedom of speech, creating the “clear and present danger” standard, explaining when the government is allowed to limit free speech. In this case, the Supreme Court viewed draft resistance as dangerous to national security.

New York Times Co. v. United States , 1971: This landmark Supreme Court case made it possible for The New York Times and Washington Post newspapers to publish the contents of the Pentagon Papers without risk of government censorship.

The Pentagon Papers were a top-secret Department of Defense study of U.S. political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. Published portions of the Pentagon Papers revealed that the presidential administrations of Harry Truman , Dwight D. Eisenhower , John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson had all misled the public about the degree of U.S. involvement in Vietnam.

Texas v. Johnson , 1990: Gregory Lee Johnson, a youth communist, burned a flag during the 1984 Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas to protest the administration of President Ronald Reagan .

The Supreme Court reversed a Texas court’s decision that Johnson broke the law by desecrating the flag. This Supreme Court Case invalidated statutes in Texas and 47 other states prohibiting flag-burning.

Freedom of Religion:

Reynolds v. United States (1878): This Supreme Court case upheld a federal law banning polygamy, testing the limits of religious liberty in America. The Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment forbids government from regulating belief but not from actions such as marriage.

Braunfeld v. Brown (1961): The Supreme Court upheld a Pennsylvania law requiring stores to close on Sundays, even though Orthodox Jews argued the law was unfair to them since their religion required them to close their stores on Saturdays as well.

Sherbert v. Verner (1963): The Supreme Court ruled that states could not require a person to abandon their religious beliefs in order to receive benefits. In this case, Adell Sherbert, a Seventh-day Adventist, worked in a textile mill. When her employer switched from a five-day to six-day workweek, she was fired for refusing to work on Saturdays. When she applied for unemployment compensation, a South Carolina court denied her claim.

Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971): This Supreme Court decision struck down a Pennsylvania law allowing the state to reimburse Catholic schools for the salaries of teachers who taught in those schools. This Supreme Court case established the “Lemon Test” for determining when a state or federal law violates the Establishment Clause—that’s the part of the First Amendment that prohibits the government from declaring or financially supporting a state religion.

Ten Commandments Cases (2005): In 2005, the Supreme Court came to seemingly contradictory decisions in two cases involving the display of the Ten Commandments on public property. In the first case, Van Orden v. Perry , the Supreme Court ruled that the display of a six-foot Ten Commandments monument at the Texas State Capital was constitutional. In McCreary County v. ACLU , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that two large, framed copies of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky courthouses violated the First Amendment.

Right to Assemble & Right to Petition:

NAACP v. Alabama (1958): When Alabama Circuit Court ordered the NAACP to stop doing business in the state and subpoenaed the NAACP for records including their membership list, the NAACP brought the matter to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled in favor of the NAACP, which Justice John Marshall Harlan II writing: “This Court has recognized the vital relationship between freedom to associate and privacy in one's associations.”

Edwards v. South Carolina (1962): On March 2, 1961, 187 Black students marched from Zion Baptist Church to the South Carolina State House, where they were arrested and convicted of breaching the peace. The Supreme Court ruled in an 8-1 decision to reverse the convictions, arguing that the state infringed on the free speech, free assembly and freedom to petition of the students.

The Bill of Rights; White House . History of the First Amendment; The University of Tennessee, Knoxville. Schenck v. United States ; C-Span .

Sign up for Inside History

Get HISTORY’s most fascinating stories delivered to your inbox three times a week.

By submitting your information, you agree to receive emails from HISTORY and A+E Networks. You can opt out at any time. You must be 16 years or older and a resident of the United States.

More details : Privacy Notice | Terms of Use | Contact Us

Power and Freedom in America Essay

What is freedom, what is power.

There is a great need to understand what freedom actually means. A misconception will lead to many problems and one of them is to abuse ones idea of freedom to hurt and subjugate others. Although it is already a given that freedom just like the concept love is not easy to define and the quest to define it can be exhaustive but at the end of the day what one will get is approximation for there is really no human words that can describe what it means as well as the fact that freedom can be interpreted in different ways by different peoples and cultures.

The best way to narrow down the definition of freedom is to narrow it by defining it according to a particular context. With regards to this discussion freedom will be define in the context of European history as well as the emergence of the United States as bastion for democracy. Paradoxically freedom will be fully understood as the proponent of this study will try to link it to the institution of slavery in Europe and then in the United States of America.

According to Walton and Smith freedom even if one delimits the research to understanding freedom in the context of slavery there are still many different ways to define the term. But in their search for the correct definition of freedom in the Western context they were able to narrow it down to three typologies of freedom. The three typologies will be shown below together with their respective authors:

Table 1 Typologies of Freedom.

The best way to look at the table shown below is to understand first that there are at least three basic forms of freedom: Personal , Sovereignal , and Civic . After that the types of freedom that can be seen on the right side of the table are the rights that should be given to the individuals as well as the social conditions needed to be able to experience the basic freedoms that Patterson has pointed out earlier.

According to Patterson personal freedom is the sense that a person can do anything he or she wants at the same time it is the sense that he or she is not coerced to do something that is not desired (Walton & Smith, 2). Sovereignal freedom on the other hand is the power to do anything without regard for the rights of others (Walton & Smith, 2). Civic freedom is the capacity of adult members of a community or nation to participate in its life and governance (Walton & Smith, 2).

Foner and King’s ideas can be seen as supporting Patterson’s ideas by giving the reason why personal and civic freedom is possible in the first place. For instance Foner asserts that each human has natural rights that enable him to feel the need for freedom and at the same time these rights should compel others to respect his rights to be free. The same is echoed by King who in essence is saying that there should be no arbitrary legal or institutional restrictions that will limit the person’s capacity for freedom.

At the onset of the discussion one can easily see that there is no harmony among the typologies. There are some instances when they support each other but there are times when they contradict each other. For example while Patterson declared that there are personal and civic freedoms he also acknowledges that there are powerful entities who have the power to do as they pleases irregardless of what others may say or do.

For instance the Internal Revenue Services (IRS) can easily impose their will on another and order that person or organization to submit to their auditing procedures. The person being scrutinized under the investigative powers of the IRS can protest and say I need to go on vacation and that he had promised his sons and daughters that they would go to Disneyland this weekend. But the IRS could just as easily lay down the law and say hey you need to work with us this coming weekend and show us your financials.

Based on the preceding discussion one can easily see the link between freedom and power. First of all freedom is the main prerequisite before a person can achieve power. Secondly, power emanates from freedom. And finally, power can restrict the freedom that is enjoyed by others. There is that tension between freedom and power plus the interaction with other people who had the same capabilities. This means that the freedom exercised by others will be the chain that can bind other people groups.

This is demonstrated by the following. A man gets up from his bed, gets out from his own house, takes the car to the train station and from there get tickets to travel to the next city. The aforementioned scenario can be considered as mundane and many will say what does this got to do with the discussion regarding power and freedom? Well, one has to remember that 200 years or so ago there are some groups of people in the United States that could not perform the aforementioned activities. It is illegal for them to do so.

Two centuries before this date African-Americans could not own their own homes, they could not purchase luxury items such as an expensive means of transportation, they could not move freely and they could not travel to the next city. This is made impossible by United States laws. This is because during that time African-Americans are considered as less than humans, they are properties of their masters, they are slaves.

Freedom is a concept that is difficult to define. There are so many shades of meaning. But one way to limit the analysis of this term is to study it in the context of Western history. This can be done specifically in the United States of America a nation that had its shares of tyrants, uprisings, and slavery. Using the information that can be gleaned from studying its more than 200 year history one can declare with confidence like Patterson that freedom is indeed personal and civic. This is the type of freedom desired by the people of the United States. Moreover, one has to add another type of freedom which is called sovereignal because in a society where freedom is experienced there are those who rise to the top and they will begin to consolidate their power as rulers and protectors of the people.

Since there are those who rise to the top and become the elite of society personal and civic freedom is not without bounds. There are people in society who has the freedom to exert their power and they do this either to enslave or to enforce laws. This means that it is impossible to have unlimited freedom in this society because there are those who will impose laws that will limit the freedom enjoyed by other.

Power emanates from freedom and this is a good thing. This power can be used to help the person achieve his dreams and goals in life. This will also make the person feel fulfilled and satisfied. On the other hand this same power can be used to limit the freedom of others in a positive or negative way. This the tension between the two, freedom versus power. One cannot drop the one in favor of the other, these two forces must work hand in hand. If power is used to enforce laws that will benefit the general public then power is good. But when power is used to enslave others so that a minority can live a life of comfort and great wealth then freedom and power is misused.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 7). Power and Freedom in America. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-and-freedom-in-america/

"Power and Freedom in America." IvyPanda , 7 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/power-and-freedom-in-america/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Power and Freedom in America'. 7 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Power and Freedom in America." March 7, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-and-freedom-in-america/.

1. IvyPanda . "Power and Freedom in America." March 7, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-and-freedom-in-america/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Power and Freedom in America." March 7, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/power-and-freedom-in-america/.

• Xiaomi Firm in Porter's and Mile and Show's Strategy Typologies
• Property Crime and Typologies
• "Race Over" Essay by Orlando Patterson
• "Give Me Liberty an American History" by Eric Foner
• "A Short History of Reconstruction" by Eric Foner
• Views on Women’s Suffrage by E.Kuhlman, L.Woodworth-Ney and E.Foner
• Intellectual Property: Patterson’s Analysis
• Patterson Manufacturing Firm's Production and Profit
• Comparing and Contrasting Lectures by Dr. Scott and Dr. Patterson
• A Short History of Reconstruction' by E. Foner and 'A Nation Under Our Feet' by S. Hahn
• New Generation and Politics in the US
• Haiti and Cape Verde Democracy: History and Philosophy
• Political Self-Interest vs. Advocacy for Others
• "Hidden Iran" by Ray Takeyh
• Public Opinion and Democracy: Under the Influence?

• About Us - Overview
• Job Opportunities
• Master Plan Development
• Enabling Legislation
• The Constitutional Memorandum
• The Freedom Trail
• Legal Notices
• Press Releases
• Photo Library
• Video Library
• Logo Library
• By the Numbers
• Story Ideas
• Government Relations
• Tour Guide Licensing
• Directions Overview
• Driving Distances
• Parking - Cars
• Motorcoaches - Arrival & Departure
• Parking - Motorcoaches & Buses
• Bus Driver's Survival Guide - Cheap Eats & More
• Events Overview
• Partners & Offers
• Feedback - Group and Guided Tours
• Brochure Request

Search form

For more information: 215.525.1776 [email protected]

• Buy Tickets
• Field Trips Overview
• Make a Reservation
• Scavenger Hunts
• Yellow Fever Tour
• Independence Hall Tickets
• Liberty Bell Visitor Guide
• Virtual Field Trip
• NEW: Flat Stanley Field Trips
• NEW - Combo Package - Museum of the American Revolution
• Boy Scouts, Cub Scouts & Girl Scouts
• Constitution Day & Essay Contest
• Educational Standards
• Suggested Itineraries For Visits To Historic Philadelphia
• Teacher Resource Guide for Grades K-12
• Testimonials
• Top 10 Reasons To Take The Constitutional Walking Tour of Philadelphia
• Certificate of Achievement
• Black History Field Trip Combo Package
• Performance Opportunities - Parades & Other Venues
• Field Trip Grants
• Timeline - Road to Nationhood
• Philadelphia Firsts
• Founding Documents Overview
• Group Tours Overview
• Theme Tours
• The Constitutional Bus Tour of Philadelphia
• Guided Tours Overview
• Combo Package - The Constitutional & Spirits of '76 Ghost Tour
• Independence Hall Tickets & Visitor Guide
• Philly Attractions Guide
• VIP Tours Overview
• VIP Tour Map
• VIP Tour Reservation Request
• The Constitutional App Overview
• The Constitutional App - Tour Map
• The Constitutional Walking Tour App - Credits
• Purchase a CD - Audio Tour
• Field Trips

2023 American Freedom Essay Contest

In honor of Constitution Day, The Constitutional Walking Tour wants students to give their views about American freedom. The American Freedom Essay Contest challenges educators to get their students to write a 100-300 word essay on the importance of freedom in their lives. Entries will be judged in Elementary School, Middle School and High School categories with the winner in each category earning a free field trip with The Constitutional Walking Tour for his/her class. 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR EDUCATORS

• Step 1  - Review The Constitutional's many free educational resources available at by visiting  www.TheConstitutional.com/1787 .
• Step 2  - Prepare for the contest by having your students find an example of a freedom like Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Assembly in The Philadelphia Inquirer or your local hometown newspaper.
• Step 3  - Have your students write their own individual essays on "How a particular American freedom (i.e., Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Vote, Freedom of Assembly) makes people's lives better." Elementary School Students (grades 1-5) are required to write an essay of approximately 100 (one hundred) words. Middle School Students (grades 6-8) and High School Students (grades 9-12) are required to write an essay not to exceed 300 (three hundred) words.
• Step 4  - Collect the essays from your students. Note: All entries for grades 3-12 must be typed. Entries for grades 1-2 can either be typed or handwritten in neat legible writing, by an adult if necessary.
• Step 5  - Review the Contest Terms & Conditions

All entries can either be submitted online at www.TheConstitutional.com/essay or via the U.S. Mail to the address below:

American Freedom Essay Contest c/o The Constitutional Walking Tour P.O. Box 2066 Philadelphia, PA 19103

Please note that each essay entry submitted via U.S. Mail must also include  the contest entry form  (PDF format). Handwritten entries from grades 1-2 must be submitted in hard copy along with the contest entry form via U.S. Mail to the address above.

USE THE NEWS to prepare for the contest by finding an example of a freedom like Freedom of Speech, Freedom to Vote or Freedom of Assembly in The Philadelphia Inquirer or your local newspaper. Write how this freedom makes people's lives better.

Winners  Winners are usually announced some time in early December each year.

Previous Winners  You can read  previous years' winning entries in the American Freedom Essay Contest by clicking here .

Entries become the property of The Constitutional Walking Tour of Philadelphia and may be published. Please read the contest's  full terms and conditions .

To sumbit essays online, please complete the form below. Alternatively, you can mail in your hard copy essay submission along with a completed entry form -  Click here for mail-in details  (PDF Format). For questions, call 215.525.1776 or email us at  [email protected] .

Deadline for entries is Friday, October 13, 2023.

Submit Essays

Enter up to 30 essays using the form below. Enter your first essay and then click the [Add Another Essay] button below the form to add another essay. Continue adding essays (up to 30) and then click submit when you are finished.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

The Exploitation of ‘Freedom’ in America

By Elisabeth Anker

Ms. Anker is a professor of American studies at George Washington University and the author of “Ugly Freedoms.”

It would seem there is a lot of “freedom” being trumpeted by state officials these days.

Within hours of becoming governor of Virginia, Glenn Youngkin signed an executive order to ban the teaching of critical race theory, explaining that the state must promote “freedom of thought.” He then moved to lift mask mandates in public schools, citing “individual liberty.” In mid-January, Florida lawmakers debated an “individual freedom” bill that would limit discussions about race and discrimination in schools and businesses.

Around the same time, conservative politicians in Georgia created a Freedom Caucus that seeks to, among other things, keep “ dangerous ideology ” out of schools. And, in Iowa, a Parental Freedom in Education Act would have allowed parents to prevent children from learning anything they find objectionable, inspect teachers’ curriculum and lesson plans at any time and challenge mask mandates. (The bill was rejected in the Iowa Senate.)

Each of these actions used the language of freedom to justify anti-democratic politics. These, then, are what I call “ugly freedoms”: used to block the teaching of certain ideas, diminish employees’ ability to have power in the workplace and undermine public health.

These are not merely misunderstood freedoms, or even just a cynical use of the language of freedom to frame bigoted policies. They manifest, instead, a particular interpretation of freedom that is not expansive, but exclusionary and coercive.

Indeed, there is a long history of ugly freedoms in this country. From the start of the American experiment the language of freedom applied only to a privileged few. At the time of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, only 2 percent of the city’s population were qualified to vote. Slave codes allowed white property owners to possess Black humans — creating what the historian Tyler Stovall called “ white freedom ,” the “belief (and practice) that freedom is central to white racial identity, and that only white people can or should be free.” This freedom for the white master extended to torture, rape and lifelong control over the humans he (or she) owned.

In early American history, claims for men’s freedom permitted domestic violence against women, and a husband’s prerogative and privacy allowed him to beat his wife. In 1827 the jurist and legal scholar James Kent argued on behalf of husbands: “The law has given him a reasonable superiority and control over” the person of his wife, he wrote. “He may even put gentle restraints upon her liberty, if her conduct be such as to require it.” In other words: a woman’s freedom was at the discretion of her husband.

In the 20th century, racial segregation was justified as the freedom of white people to control public space and make their own business choices. In his infamous 1963 inaugural speech on segregation, Gov. George Wallace of Alabama couched his stance against integration as “our fight for freedom,” and justified it as “the ideology of our free fathers.” We can call that ideology white supremacy.

These are but a few examples of how claims for “freedom” have long suppressed the rights of nonwhites, women and workers. It is true the language of freedom was central to emancipation, suffrage and democratic movements of all kinds, but it has also justified violence and discrimination.

Today, more and more laws, caucuses, rallies and hard-right movements use the language of freedom as a cudgel to erode democratic governance and civil rights; these laws expand the creep of authoritarianism. One Jan. 6 insurrectionist insisted, “I’m here for freedom,” when describing his participation in the attack on the Capitol. Mask mandate opponents have cited “ health freedom ,” even if their refusal to mask denies freedom of movement to immunocompromised people and makes communities more vulnerable to Covid.

The frenzy of ugly freedoms in anti-democratic politics threatens to overtake freedom’s meaning entirely, harnessing freedom solely to projects of exclusion, privilege and harm.

Still, today we can also see vibrant political movements and legislation reclaiming freedom as a right for all. These freedoms expand Americans’ abilities to both live a flourishing life and participate in public affairs.

This inclusive freedom sometimes takes shape in legislative acts. The Freedom to Vote Act and the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act would have promoted just this type of freedom. The bills ambitiously aimed to increase voting access by making Election Day a federal holiday (thus freeing workers to get to the polls), improving voting by mail, increasing transparency in campaign finance, and expanding protections for minority voters. By making it easier for all Americans to vote, it promoted a form of freedom that expands rather than contracts democracy, as it insists that freedom means all Americans must have equal power to shape governing systems.

Yet the legislation was blocked by Republicans last month. Some of those same Republicans actively support voter suppression laws in their home states that enable partisan interference in elections and place burdens on poor and minority voters.

In January, New Jersey had a more successful reclamation of freedom with the passage of the Freedom of Reproductive Choice Act . This law broadly ensures that women maintain control over reproduction and childbearing, guaranteeing this freedom before it may be lost at the federal level when the Supreme Court rules in Dobbs v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization this year. The act draws on the language of freedom to ensure women’s capacity to make decisions about birth control, abortion and pregnancy, promoting a form of freedom in which people determine their own futures regarding childbearing. (Unfortunately the bill, in its final iteration, did not remove cost barriers for abortion, thus making it harder for lower-income women to attain that freedom.)

To be sure, efforts to counter ugly freedoms are not limited to legislative actions. They include unionization efforts that fight for freedom in the workplace. And they extend to robust social movements that organize for Black, transgender and disability freedoms. These movements articulate a democratic language of freedom that challenges structures of privilege that allow some Americans undue power over others, and they expand citizens’ access to governing power.

The ugly freedoms in American politics today increasingly justify minority rule, prejudice and anti-democratic governance. If we don’t push back against their growing popularity, we will have ceded what freedom means to those who support monopolistic rule and furthered the country’s downward slide toward authoritarianism. Creating and supporting democratic alternatives to ugly freedom, both in legislatures and on the streets, are urgent tasks for all who value equality, community health and the shared power to construct a free society that truly values all its members.

Elisabeth Anker (@LibAnkerDC) is a professor of American studies at George Washington University, the author of “Ugly Freedoms” and a co-editor of the journal Theory & Event.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram .

Freedom in America Essay

Our activity

Finished orders

Professional writers

Writers online now

Operators are online

Of 5 average writers' score

What is freedom ? Is our understanding of this word correct? A lot of us believe that they have a comprehension of this word. I can say that it is among those terms that we come to know at an early age because we all at the end of the day seek freedom. Do we have a comprehensive understanding of what freedom in America truly means? We think that we are free, but the reality is that we are far from it. We are the community that operates within rules and laws, which limit freedom but let us live harmoniously with each other. However, I must point out that America is exceptional and this freedom in America essay example reveals why.

What is Freedom?

As I mentioned in the introduction, the term ‘freedom’ is one that we come to know quite early because, even as toddlers, we wanted freedom from something or someone. For instance, we required independence from our parents because they forced us to eat vegetables, or forced us to go to school, among other things. Freedom is defined in different ways and here are two such definitions:

• It is the right to say and think or act in a manner that one wants.
• It is also the act of being free and not enslaved or captive.

This essay on freedom in America takes a look at how this great nation has given its residents this elusive right in a world where it is becoming a serious challenge. Any freedom essay that you will come across expresses a fear that looms because there are parts of the world where independence is a serious challenge.

Check Our Samples

Argumentative Essay

New Technology: Beneficial or Dangerous?

Academic level: Bachelor

Subject: Communication

Paper format: MLA

Corporate Social Responsibility

Subject: Management

Paper format: Harvard

Master’s Prepared Nurse Interview

Academic level: Master

Paper format: APA

Research Paper

The Maya Tribe

Academic level: Undergraduate

Subject: History

Freedom in America

Few countries on earth have welcomed immigrants and given them the freedom and opportunities to rise to the top of society in businesses, politically, socially and financially. It has been the case for almost more than a century. I think that this aspect speaks volumes about this nation. I once came across an article by former US Secretary of state Colin Powell, where he talked about America that he believed in . He spoke of how this country inspired freedom and democracy in other nations. He compared America before and today’s, their kind and welcoming nature hadn’t changed. People may harbor anti-American sentiments but they still long to go there. Why is that the case?

The answer is pretty simple, freedom. Freedom to be who you are, and live your dream without restrictions. Speech, religion, political affiliations, sports, and lifestyle are areas where the right to enjoy them is a sensitive issue. The liberty to be an Atheist, Muslim or Christian is a personal choice.

Political Freedom

Politics and democracy are central issues in society. The freedom to hold different views politically doesn’t exist in certain regions. The liberty to pick a leader of your choice is one that people take for granted when they are supposed to be glad that they can. In the United States, everyone has the right to have a different opinion politically.

The situation is quite the opposite in some continents where dictatorships are the order of the day. In such regimes, a lot of people have died for expressing a differing political view. Electing a leader that you believe will fulfill the agenda of citizens is not a guarantee, but in America, you can be assured that you can and will pick a leader of your choosing. Political freedom is in another level in this great nation.

• A black person with Kenyan heritage for a president.
• Missed having a female for president by a whisker.
• A business tycoon with no history in politics for a president.

These three scenarios show a continent that’s open to political diversity, where else on earth can those scenarios play out? Quite frankly, none! Almost every essay about freedom never misses mentioning politics and democracy, because they are the backbone of society. Any society that doesn’t respect this has problems with coexistence. Its respect of these two factors can describe freedom in America.

Freedom of Speech

You can speak your mind without fear of being reprimanded as long as it doesn’t infringe on the right of others. This what liberty in America looks like. Journalists are not denied the chance to report the news as it is. The opportunity to speak your thoughts and mind is just freedom of expression. A freedom essay, regardless of its focus, always mentions speech. Did you know that there are actual places on earth where women cannot speak in a gathering where men are? It is unbelievable and a backward way of living in this century.

The fact that you can get up each morning and speak as you wish, on social media, through music or poetry, among others, must be appreciated. There are places where the government regulates access to media platforms such as Facebook. All that America asks of you is that you don’t misuse this freedom by causing harm to others or yourself.

Freedom of Religion

Religion is more of a hot topic and one that I would not want to go into deeply. There have been so many deaths for centuries because of it. Who is right? Who is wrong? I say both because this is a personal choice and whatever you believe to be right is. America, despite suffering much from the war on religion, has been open to letting all practice the faith that they desire. This is among the top defining features of how American freedom looks like. You can worship in your way. Sadly, it is the opposite of specific regions. Many have been executed because of holding different religious beliefs.

Even immigrants in this nation are not denied a chance to worship as they please, unlike some countries where practicing a religion different from theirs is a cause for arrest or even execution. An essay on freedom always has a way of letting us see how flawed we are as human beings. Why would we want to force our faith onto someone else when it is a personal decision? Regardless of our religious beliefs, we should coexist with each other.

The liberty to realize your dreams only happens in America. There is a saying that dreams only come true in America. Well, the system of society is such that it is open to one and all, and what they have to offer. If you’re good at something, don’t shy away from it because, in this great land, you can be whomever and whatever you aspire to be. There are countless opportunities available for your dreams to be realized, and you have the freedom to cease these opportunities.

This freedom in America essay example highlights to us what freedom in America is and what is special about it. The truth is that the American society is so advanced that people have the freedom to hold a different political, religious and social belief without any repercussions so long as it doesn’t negatively affect others. The liberty expressed in America is an inspiration to most societies today. This is why American freedom deserves the attention it gets. It is an anchor for communities across the globe.

America's Religious Moderation

A new documentary recounts the history of religious freedom in our country from colonial times until today.

Free Exercise: America’s Story of Religious Liberty , a new documentary film produced in connection with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, recounts the history of religious freedom in our country from colonial times until today. Narrated by journalist and historian Richard Brookhiser, the film focuses on six episodes in which minority religious groups fought for their right to practice their faiths and participate as equal citizens: Quakers in seventeenth-century New Amsterdam; Baptists in eighteenth-century Virginia; and Black Christians, Catholics, Mormons, and Jews in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The film ends with a panel discussion on religious freedom today, when newly arrived communities like Hindus, Muslims, and Buddhists likewise wish to make their way in American society while remaining true to their religious heritage.

Free Exercise is an engaging and instructive film. The producers have interviewed noted scholars and commentators, including Michael McConnell, Akhil Amar, Rick Garnett, and others known to Law & Liberty readers, as well as several religious leaders. All have interesting things to say. The film humanizes the history of religious freedom in America. It shows that, as much as on legal texts like the First Amendment, religious freedom has depended on the decisions of everyday Americans, both members of minority religions who insisted on their rights and members of majority communities who gradually, and not without conflict, came to see their neighbors with different beliefs and practices as equally worthy participants in American society. The film suggests that by holding America to its formal commitment to religious freedom, minority religions have made our country a more peaceful and tolerant place, a real achievement in a world in which brutal religious persecution unfortunately continues.

But—and here is a point the film doesn’t make, but could have—those religions often changed as well. Religions that began by threatening basic American norms often came to adopt them over time. The story of religious freedom in America is not only one of our society’s gradual acceptance of religious differences. It is also the story of minority religions moderating in ways that minimized intercommunal tensions and allowed groups to live together in peace.

The film begins in seventeenth-century New Amsterdam. The Dutch West India Company, which ran the colony from the Netherlands and cared principally about making money, welcomed other peoples to New Amsterdam, including Portuguese Jews and English Quakers. Many of the latter group fled persecution in the New England colonies. Put out of your mind the image of sober, industrious pacifists with broad-brimmed hats. Seventeenth-century Quakers were a rowdy bunch given to loud public proselytizing that involved breaking bottles. New Amsterdam’s governor, Peter Stuyvesant, not an easy-going man in the best of circumstances, found this behavior obnoxious and, in 1656, banned Quakers from holding public meetings.

A group of colonists in what is now Flushing, a neighborhood in New York City’s Borough of Queens, signed a petition refusing to cooperate with Stuyvesant’s order. The Flushing Remonstrance argued that Quakers should be tolerated on Christian grounds—an interesting fact, given the conventional (but incorrect) understanding that religious freedom derived entirely from Enlightenment rather than Christian commitments. The citizens of Flushing, the petition declared, would allow Quakers to operate among them unmolested, “desiring to doe unto all men as we desire all men should doe unto us, which is the true law both of Church and State; for our Saviour sayeth this is the law and the prophets.”

All 31 signers of the Remonstrance were English, not Dutch, which suggests that the protest had an ethnic component. But none of the signers were Quakers, and from a religious perspective, the petitioners were entirely disinterested. Stuyvesant put the leaders of the protest in prison but relented when the Dutch West India Company countermanded his order and instructed him to stop oppressing religious minorities. Religious persecution was bad for business.

Free Exercise offers an accessible and engaging treatment of the history of religious freedom in America and will interest anyone who wants to know more about it.

Another minority community that challenged majority beliefs were Catholics. Until well into the twentieth century, Americans saw Catholicism as a threatening force, deeply inimical to the country’s core values. As late as 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt remarked privately that America was a Protestant country and Catholics (and Jews) were here “on sufferance.” The film explores the anti-Catholic riots that broke out in New York and Philadelphia in the 1830s, where mobs burned Catholic churches. (One image from the film stands out: St. Patrick’s Old Cathedral in lower Manhattan, surrounded by a wall that still stands, where parishioners stood with guns to protect the church from Know-Nothings who attacked it.) In the 1920s, the Klan led a campaign to close Catholic schools. In 1928, anti-Catholicism helped defeat the Democratic candidate for president, Al Smith.

The LDS Church provides an even starker example. Founded in upstate New York by Joseph Smith in the 1830s, the Mormons, a non-Trinitarian group with their own scripture, posed a serious challenge to the orthodox Protestant majority—especially given the Mormon practice of plural marriage. State governments, and eventually the federal government as well, severely harassed the Mormons, who fled across the continent and settled in the Utah Territory. When Mormons challenged the territory’s law against bigamy as a violation of their free exercise rights, the Supreme Court scoffed. In Reynolds v. United States (1878) and Davis v. Beason (1890), the Court held that the First Amendment did not require giving Mormons the right to practice plural marriage. In fact, the Court said in Davis , polygamy should not be dignified as a “religious” practice at all.

Yet today, Catholics and Mormons are part of mainstream American life. The current president is Catholic; whatever objections his opponents have to him, religion is not among them. A Mormon ran for president on the Republican ticket in 2012 and narrowly lost. In some measure, as Free Exercise suggests, Catholics and Mormons are accepted today because they fought for their rights and because America lived up to its core commitment to religious freedom. The United States proved worthy of the First Amendment.

But that is only part of the explanation. The other part is that, like the Quakers, who went from being bottle-breaking radicals to sober citizens, Catholics and Mormons themselves changed in ways that made them less threatening to the American majority. One major point of contention between the Catholic Church and the wider American society had to do with religious liberty itself. The nineteenth-century Church was the Church of the Syllabus of Errors (1864), a papal document that condemned freedom of conscience and the separation of church and state as dangerous heresies. America’s Protestant majority saw this document and the values it espoused as hostile to fundamental American commitments. In the 1928 campaign, The Atlantic published an open letter questioning whether a Catholic like Smith could serve as president, citing the Syllabus and other papal pronouncements on church and state.

A hundred years later, though, and largely through the efforts of American Catholics like Fr. John Courtney Murray, the Second Vatican Council adopted Dignitatis Humanae , a document that specifically endorses religious liberty as a civil right. Catholic scholars have argued that Dignitatis Humanae and the Syllabus of Errors can be interpreted consistently with one another and that, from a theological perspective, there was no change. However theologians understand the situation, though, after Dignitatis Humanae , something had indeed changed as a practical matter. A major point of tension between the Catholic Church and American culture had disappeared, largely because of American influence.

Or consider the LDS Church. A primary source of conflict between Mormons and the wider American society in the nineteenth century had to do with plural marriage, the issue in cases like Reynolds and Davis . In 1890, however, the LDS Church officially ended the practice—making it possible for Utah to be admitted as a state six years later. Practically speaking, Mormonism changed in a way that made it much less threatening to the wider American public. Mormons conformed to social convention, and relations between the LDS Church and other Americans have been better ever since.

What causes religions in America to move toward the mean over time? Some argue that the Lockean ideology that underlies our First Amendment is designed to encourage religious moderation—to minimize religious “enthusiasms” that threaten social peace. If that’s the case, Lockeanism certainly seems to be working. Or perhaps another factor explains things. Two hundred years ago, Tocqueville wrote about the strong pressures for social conformity that exist in the United States, where he observed “little independence of mind.” Whether as a result of ideology or social norms, or both, the pattern is apparent.

Of course, another way to describe religious moderation is the watering-down of important spiritual commitments, and that is not necessarily a good thing. Free Exercise doesn’t address that question, but that doesn’t detract from the film’s importance. The film offers an accessible and engaging treatment of the history of religious freedom in America and will interest anyone who wants to know more about it. For information about where to view the film, check out the website, here .

Essay Embracing Scylla and Charybdis Jack Andrews

Essay Human Dignity and the Politics of Dune Kody W. Cooper

Book Review Justice Breyer’s Problematic “Pragmatism” John O. McGinnis

Book Review The Fighting Economist Julia R. Cartwright

Essay Hope for Harvard? James Hankins

Home / Essay Samples / Life / Freedom / The Concept of Freedom in America

The Concept of Freedom in America

• Category: Sociology , Life , Social Issues
• Topic: American Values , Freedom , Freedom of Expression

Pages: 1 (432 words)

Views: 1215

• Downloads: -->

--> ⚠️ Remember: This essay was written and uploaded by an--> click here.

Found a great essay sample but want a unique one?

are ready to help you with your essay

You won’t be charged yet!

Discrimination Essays

Capital Punishment Essays

Gender Inequality Essays

Gay Marriage Essays

Death Penalty Essays

Related Essays

We are glad that you like it, but you cannot copy from our website. Just insert your email and this sample will be sent to you.

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service  and  Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Your essay sample has been sent.

In fact, there is a way to get an original essay! Turn to our writers and order a plagiarism-free paper.

samplius.com uses cookies to offer you the best service possible.By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .--> -->