Do you think hate speech should be protected speech?

I think it would help keep our politics more civil. My boyfriend is from Canada and though he's really not political at all, when he read an editorial letter in the paper from a Tea Party member supporting the idea that all right-wingers should take their guns to Washington, DC and overthrow the government, he was shocked that it's legal to say that here. He told me that in Canada, if you openly supported a violent overthrow of the Canadian government, you'd probably be going to prison for a very long time.

 

I think what would really punish them is to take away their tax exempt status because of their church's discrimatory stance as they're more of a hate group than an actual church. They can still say whatever they want, but their organization will no longer be exempt from taxes and that would probably be a bigger blow to them.

I agree that bad speech should be combated with good. A lot of people think freedom of speech means you can get away with saying whatever you want; all it does is protect you from the government punishing you for what was said.

Now, like what AG brought up with the tea party, if somebody is bringing up a movement to overthrow the government openly, that's treason and should be treated as such. In that sense, I do agree with Canada

 

No. No. No. No.

Never.

Fascists, racists, homophobes etc. should not get special protection for spewing hatred and harming others. I like how some laws are in Austria, Germany, and the Czech Republic; Fascism is heavily censored and illegal, and that should go for most similar speech and political beliefs.

The US does not protect free speech. The US harms millions of people with actively and passively censoring speech, has a history of stopping left-wing speech, but does nothing to prevent far-right hate groups from spewing their drivel. Even if the US were what you think it is, then that hate speech should still be banned. What that implies is that it's justified that in the US you can't speak out against companies without libel charges, but you can speak against the oppressed with dreadful hatred and digusting bigotry and have a legal blank cheque.

 

Heck No it shouldn't be protected

 

No, they do not. That's a ridiculous act of doublethink; to say that they don't, but they do. The US has a high tolerance for hatred and extremism (as long as it's right-wing), not for free speech.

 

It's not free speech if we censor others, no matter how irrational, stupid, or inflammatory an opinion may be. Irrationality can be defeated with rationality. Stupidity can be defeated with intelligence. Legislation banning certain forms of speech could easily be abused. Besides, banning any sort of speech violates the First Amendment; its purpose is to prevent the government from silencing you (it does not, however, prevent people from telling you to "STFU n00b").

---------- Post added 12th Apr 2014 at 05:45 PM ----------

The Transsexual Empire was a book written by a left-wing radical feminist named Janice Raymond. It's a book full of hatred and personal attacks against others. I'd say it set the rights of transsexual people back by about a decade or two. Maybe more. Hate speech is nonpartisan; anyone could be guilty of it.

 

When the purpose of the speech is to cause deliberate harm, intimidation, or to incite hatred. It's easy to decide. In fact, most of Northern Europe and Oceania have done it to different extents without massive problems. And people like Geert Wilders still manage to speak.

 

Hate speech is solely to inflict pain and to denigrate others.

So... no h8

 

No and this really is a non-issue in pretty much every western country that isn't the US. I'm not sure your country will ever grow up.

 

I'm pretty much on board with America's current policy on speech/hate speech, and the Supreme Court's decisions on the topic. Definitely not in favor of restricting it.

If you don't like what someone has to say, well, get over it (or blast them rhetorically back).

 

Actually, It's pretty damned easy. You listen to them and what they're saying. It's pretty easy to understand what even "subtle" bigots are saying. It's not like there's great nuance within Fascism, white supremacy, anti-Semitism etc.

 

Yes, because Sweden and Germany are the epitome of Neo-Facist states.

 

I don't think those countries are as bad as far as politics go though. Every politician in the US seems to have an agenda, and it is not "the public good." They would not hesitate to use it to gain power over us.

 

But that's kind of the point. We're talking about hate speech. Banning hate speech doesn't open the door to banning political opposition. Banning white supremacism and Nazism doesn't open the door to dictatorship. That was totally unrelated, and I'll remind you that far more unstable countries have banned it without going into chaos.