Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Hate Speech" can mean anything depending on viewpoint. I would say that anyone who would make their personal definition of "hate speech" a "crime" is only concerned with limiting or abolishing free speech.
If anyone wants to destroy "hate speech" without becoming a thug who is as bad as those who use "hate speech", all they have to do is counter that speech with a more rational and persuasive alternative. Any other action simply makes the anti-hate speech person exactly like their "enemy".
Liberals won the right to burn the flag on the grounds of free speech, but the first utterance of a racial derogatory can get a person put in jail. Liberals love to tout free speech until its one of their own with a bullseye on their forehead. So yes, the Liberals have completely hijacked "free speech" in order to propogate the limp-wristed ideology that (embarrassingly) forms the foundation of their social construct.
Liberals won the right to burn the flag on the grounds of free speech, but the first utterance of a racial derogatory can get a person put in jail. Liberals love to tout free speech until its one of their own with a bullseye on their forehead. So yes, the Liberals have completely hijacked "free speech" in the same of limp-wristed ideology.
Can it? Show me some examples of someone going to jail for just uttering a racial slur. Last time I checked the KKK and the WBC were still marching doing their thing with total impunity.
"Free Speech" doesn't mean free of consequences. It means free of prior restraint. Since colonial days we've held people responsible for the damage their "free speech" can cause.
Can it? Show me some examples of someone going to jail for just uttering a racial slur. Last time I checked the KKK and the WBC were still marching doing their thing with total impunity.
It absolutely can. Racial derogatories used in the commission of a crime put the actual crime into the realm of civil rights violations, which in turn has its own penalties and punishment. The actual crime is irrelevant. But once you utter a few words, you've shot yourself in the foot. Furthermore, many people have been charged with a crime for using racial slurs. Look it up. How's that for "free speech?"
"Free Speech" doesn't mean free of consequences. It means free of prior restraint. Since colonial days we've held people responsible for the damage their "free speech" can cause.
Yep, otherwise one might say that free speech does not need to be allowed in the constitution as it is natural anyway as long as someone can speak in the first place
"Free Speech" doesn't mean free of consequences. It means free of prior restraint. Since colonial days we've held people responsible for the damage their "free speech" can cause.
So what liabilities or actual damages have "hate" vibrations of air caused at any point in history? I can understand, to some extent, slander that may cause actual damage in business and the like, but "hate speech"? Hurting people's fragile egos, offending them, is hardly an initiation of force. An actual direct threat, I can understand, but that is not what the censors of this world are screaming about, and there are already laws against this.
Although, it is perfectly "okay" for our Resident to rile up the drooling proletariats against the evil "rich", demonize an entire industry to further his authoritarian agenda, or belittle entire factions of the populace who disagree with his policies. That's fine to the would-be censors I guess.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.