Should hate speech be counted as free speech?

[Ashoka]

Do you think that hate speech should be protected in the US? Or do you believe there should be laws against hate speech?

I've always personally been a fan of criminalizing hate speech. It can incite to riot, lead to violence and murder, and creates a dangerous environment.

What do you all think?

 

[JustGeorge]

I don't know.

Its definitely something I'm not a fan of. Ideally, it would be nice to see it outlawed, but we don't live in an ideal world. Nothing is ever simple...

What would constitute hate speech? Would it lead to a road where we become too strict with what we call hate speech, and start censoring unpopular(but not necessarily hateful) opinions?

 

[ChristineM]

Do you think that hate speech should be protected in the US? Or do you believe there should be laws against hate speech?

I've always personally been a fan of criminalizing hate speech. It can incite to riot, lead to violence and murder, and creates a dangerous environment.

What do you all think?

Im not American but I'll stick my nose in this one.

Im a brit living in france. Both countries outlaw hate speech and i am in agreement with the laws

Even in America where complete freedom of speech is the norm i believe free speech should come with responsibility.

 

[JustGeorge]

Im not American but I'll stick my nose in this one.

Im a brit living in france. Both countries outlaw hate speech and i am in agreement with the laws

Even in America where complete freedom of speech is the norm i believe free speech should come with responsibility.

I ask because I'm curious...

What are the guidelines on what constitutes hate speech in those countries?

 

[Heyo]

Do you think that hate speech should be protected in the US? Or do you believe there should be laws against hate speech?

I've always personally been a fan of criminalizing hate speech. It can incite to riot, lead to violence and murder, and creates a dangerous environment.

What do you all think?

I'm generally more pro free speech than for censorship. "Hate speech" is just a too diffuse concept and it could be misused.
Having said that, calling for violence, inciting violence or unlawful actions, threatening people are distinct features of "hate speech" that could and should be outlawed.

 

[ChristineM]

Would it lead to a road where we become too strict with what we call hate speech, and start censoring unpopular(but not necessarily hateful) opinions?

In my experience just the opposite has happened, those vomiting hate speech have claimed the law is being used to silence them.

A prime example is Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon, who calls himself Tommy Robinson. A career criminal with multiple convictions and far right activist. Whenever he arrested breaking hate laws he (and his fans) scream blue murder that he is being victimised

 

[ChristineM]

I ask because I'm curious...

What are the guidelines on what constitutes hate speech in those countries?

France : Articles 32 and 33 prohibit anyone from publicly defaming or insulting a person or group for belonging or not belonging, in fact or in fancy, to an ethnicity, a nation, a race, a religion, a sex, or a sexual orientation, or for having a handicap.

U.K : (from the Crown Prosecution Service)
The law recognises five types of hate crime on the basis of:

• Race
• Religion
• Disability
• Sexual orientation
• Transgender identity

Any crime can be prosecuted as a hate crime if the offender has either:

• demonstrated hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

Or

• been motivated by hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Free speech should mean free speech. "Hate speech" is a terribly Orweilian concept. The government should never be allowed to restrict the speech of its citizens. That's terrifying, or should be. The government is there to uphold our rights and represent us, we are not subjects.

 

[ChristineM]

Free speech should mean free speech. "Hate speech" is a terribly Orweilian concept. The government should never be allowed to restrict the speech of its citizens. That's terrifying, or should be. The government is there to uphold our rights and represent us, we are not subjects.

So you think it's ok for a black, transgender invalid to be taunted to badly they commit suicide?

Its ok for an extreme group to incite a riot in which people are injury and killed?

 

[Link]

It should be allowed.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

So you think it's ok for a black, transgender invalid to be taunted to badly they commit suicide?

Its ok for an extreme group to incite a riot in which people are injury and killed?

No government restrictions on speech. Case closed.

 

[Link]

Discourse is the only thing to keep in check "powerful army type power" or influence of money trail type power (favors type power). If government controls discourse, then it's no longer a democracy, just a façade of it.

 

[Secret Chief]

Im not American but I'll stick my nose in this one.

Im a brit living in france. Both countries outlaw hate speech and i am in agreement with the laws

Even in America where complete freedom of speech is the norm i believe free speech should come with responsibility.

This.

Make it difficult for the fascists. You've got them in plain view, you need to deal with them.

 

[The Hammer]

So you think it's ok for a black, transgender invalid to be taunted to badly they commit suicide?

No just that if they do, they're a "sensitive snowflake baby" /s

 

[Link]

This.

Make it difficult for the fascists. You've got them in plain view, you need to deal with them.

Fascists are already ruling. How to get rid of them (from hiddenly controlling society). Impossible if you are going to silence the truth in name of hate speech. But what else is new, Satanic forces have no shame in tricking the masses to their traps.

 

[Link]

Kennedy talks about shadow government, they kill him. Next guy who rises up to expose this, "hate speech", and put in jail. Save the drama that way!

 

[ChristineM]

No government restrictions on speech. Case closed.

Your case closed. And that says much.

I have more concern for those injured as a result of hate speech.

 

[Link]

Your case closed. And that says much.

I have more concern for those injured as a result of hate speech.

So you say... but maybe really... and how can we know?

 

[ChristineM]

No just that if they do, they're a "sensitive snowflake baby" /s

Maybe, and they wind up dead. Which is why i think people who caused their death should be responsible for causing their death

 

[Viker]

Depends on what is being defined as hate speech. For the most part I am opposed to criminalization. It would have to be defined/described perfectly in order it be considered for criminal prosecution. We already have existing laws we can enforce. Slander, libel, terroristic threatening and incitement to violence are already covered. Many states/cities have hate crime laws.