Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 143

Thread: Hate speech

  1. #21
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    10-21-18 @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,968

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by CLAX1911 View Post
    As of late I've heard the term "hate speech being thrown around a lot. So, my question is, doesn't the first amendment protect speech regardless of its emotional motivations?

    The more I see this word tossed around the more it seems that people think it isn't protected.

    Your thoughts?

    I could be very wrong on this.

    To me, it seems that people who use this identifier routinely engage in the rhetoric of hate and condemnation themselves against those that they cite for using hate speech.

    The offense they seem to like to cite is not "hate" in the speech of others, but rather disagreement with their own closely held beliefs.

    The same tactic was employed in trying to silence any disagreement with the actions and policies of Obama.

    Anyone who expressed a difference of opinion with Obama was immediately called a racist.

    This seems to be, usually, just another tactic used to silence opposing thoughts.

    Of course, there is the occasional jack ass that displays the Nazi flag or threatens to blow up the White House. These are usually just hate, pure and simple.
    Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, ...every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right. -George Orwell

  2. #22
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    10-21-18 @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,968

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    You can say what you want, but if you start yelling N-word this and N-word that while shooting black people, you're going to be charged with a hate crime. Same applies for pretty much any group you do that to, including whites.
    How about those folks that holler "Call the snack bar" while killing folks?
    Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, ...every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right. -George Orwell

  3. #23
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    10-21-18 @ 12:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,968

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    People use the term "hate speech" to shut down free speech. The perception of what constitutes hate from others is completely subjective. You can think that I hate you, but only I know if I really do. You may think that because of something I said, that I hate you, but only I know if I really do. You may think that because I say something to you or about you that sounds brutal, but it may not be hateful, just brutally honest.

    Subjectivity makes it impossible to define hate speech objectively.
    I think "Hate Speech" is more about hating whole, definable groups, not just one person.
    Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book has been rewritten, every picture has been repainted, ...every date has been altered. And that process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right. -George Orwell

  4. #24
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    veni, vidi, volo in domum redire
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,590

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by code1211 View Post
    I think "Hate Speech" is more about hating whole, definable groups, not just one person.
    Some people define hate speech as saying something against an idea, or a ideology, or culture. Not just people. Hate speech is whatever anyone wants it to be so they can use the term as a tool to shut down free speech.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  5. #25
    Heavy Hitter



    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    83,647

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by code1211 View Post
    How about those folks that holler "Call the snack bar" while killing folks?
    Yelling, "Death to infidels" before opening fire upon a crowd would be a hate crime. Yelling, "My god is great," however, would not be.

  6. #26
    Heavy Hitter



    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    83,647

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    Some people define hate speech as saying something against an idea, or a ideology, or culture. Not just people. Hate speech is whatever anyone wants it to be so they can use the term as a tool to shut down free speech.
    If person X has a facebook page littered with speech calling for the death of Muslims, Blacks, Christians, Gays, Women or whatever, and they then go out and kill themselves some Muslims, Blacks, Christians, Gays, Women or whatever, then we have a solid path to follow connecting hate speech to criminal action. I see nothing wrong with punishing such a person more severely than someone who simply acts out and shoots a Muslim, Black, Christian, Gay, Woman or whatever.

  7. #27
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    05-31-17 @ 12:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,050

    Re: Hate speech

    It is somewhat protected in criminal law although there seems to be numerous attempts to curtail it and we are somewhat at the mercy of judges who rule on the law and not on personal opinions.
    However it has never been protected in civil law. And we have tons of lawyers who make money off of this.

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles area
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 12:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    9,868

    Re: Hate speech

    The constitutionality of laws regulating "hate speech" is not nearly as simple as some people here seem to think. In 1942, the Supreme Court held in Chaplinsky that "fighting words"--words "which by their very utterance inflict injury"--are not protected by the First Amendment. But in Hustler Magazine v. Falwell in 1988, the Court reversed an award of money damages to Jerry Falwell for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The claimed source of this distress was a parody Hustler had published which claimed Falwell had lost his virginity to his mother while drunk in an outhouse. The Court distinguished this sort of bare-knuckle character assassination from the fighting words in Chaplinsky.

    In R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul in 1992, the Court held unconstitutional a city ordinance under which a teenager had been punished for burning a cross in the yard of a black family. Justice Scalia's reasoning was that the ordinance criminalized hurtful speech aimed at racial or religious minorities, while allowing the same sort of speech if aimed at other unprotected groups. The opinion makes clear that some fighting words are not outside the protection of the First Amendment.

    In 1993, in Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the Court upheld a statute that imposed longer sentences for assaults that were motivated by the victim's race. The reasoning was that the statute mostly targeted conduct, rather than speech.

    There have been a few more cases since then that I don't have time to get into right now, but just the ones I've mentioned should make clear this issue can't be reduced to some simplistic formula.

  9. #29
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    veni, vidi, volo in domum redire
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,590

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    If person X has a facebook page littered with speech calling for the death of Muslims, Blacks, Christians, Gays, Women or whatever, and they then go out and kill themselves some Muslims, Blacks, Christians, Gays, Women or whatever, then we have a solid path to follow connecting hate speech to criminal action. I see nothing wrong with punishing such a person more severely than someone who simply acts out and shoots a Muslim, Black, Christian, Gay, Woman or whatever.
    The crime is what caused the harm, not the thoughts that were spoken or the motivation behind the crime. However, what a person says before a crime can be used to demonstrate intent, premeditation, and/or motive, which all go toward defining the actual crime. Such as the difference between First Degree Murder and Manslaughter. It makes no difference, or at least it shouldn't, why the person killed another person, other than to define the actual crime. Killing a person by definition is a crime of hate. You don't murder people you like.

    That a person of one race killed a person of another race should not make a difference. That a person of one religion killed a person of another religion should not make a difference. That a heterosexual killed a homosexual shouldn't make difference. That a CIS gender person killed a trans person shouldn't make a difference.

    The crime is the killing. The defining of the potential charge and potential sentence can be defined in part by motive, but motive is not the crime.

    One thing I use to help me evaluate if something should be utilized by me in my thinking, is to reverse or exchange terms in a statement. For instance, in a statement that includes race, I would exchange one race of another and see if the statement still stands. In this instance, we could take your statement, "I see nothing wrong with punishing such a person more severely than someone who simply acts out and shoots a Muslim, Black, Christian, Gay, Woman or whatever." and change it around to say, "I see nothing wrong with punishing such a person less severely than I would someone who shoots a Muslim, Black, Christian, Gay, Woman or whatever."

    If it doesn't seem reasonable to punish a person less harshly for killing a person just because they wanted to kill a person, any person, then it's not reasonable to punish a person more severely that killed a person because of some special classification. In both cases, there would be premeditation of murder. One that chose their victim for whatever reason (ease of access, simple opportunity of circumstances, or whatever) while the other was motivated by some other factor. The crime is the same.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  10. #30
    Heavy Hitter



    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    83,647

    Re: Hate speech

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    The crime is what caused the harm, not the thoughts that were spoken or the motivation behind the crime. However, what a person says before a crime can be used to demonstrate intent, premeditation, and/or motive, which all go toward defining the actual crime. Such as the difference between First Degree Murder and Manslaughter. It makes no difference, or at least it shouldn't, why the person killed another person, other than to define the actual crime. Killing a person by definition is a crime of hate. You don't murder people you like.

    That a person of one race killed a person of another race should not make a difference. That a person of one religion killed a person of another religion should not make a difference. That a heterosexual killed a homosexual shouldn't make difference. That a CIS gender person killed a trans person shouldn't make a difference.

    The crime is the killing. The defining of the potential charge and potential sentence can be defined in part by motive, but motive is not the crime.

    One thing I use to help me evaluate if something should be utilized by me in my thinking, is to reverse or exchange terms in a statement. For instance, in a statement that includes race, I would exchange one race of another and see if the statement still stands. In this instance, we could take your statement, "I see nothing wrong with punishing such a person more severely than someone who simply acts out and shoots a Muslim, Black, Christian, Gay, Woman or whatever." and change it around to say, "I see nothing wrong with punishing such a person less severely than I would someone who shoots a Muslim, Black, Christian, Gay, Woman or whatever."

    If it doesn't seem reasonable to punish a person less harshly for killing a person just because they wanted to kill a person, any person, then it's not reasonable to punish a person more severely that killed a person because of some special classification. In both cases, there would be premeditation of murder. One that chose their victim for whatever reason (ease of access, simple opportunity of circumstances, or whatever) while the other was motivated by some other factor. The crime is the same.
    The issue is not that the crime was interracial or interreligious. The issue is that ideology is an aggravating factor in some crimes. From what I've read, crimes of that nature are more egregious, and perpetrators of them also have higher incidents of recidivism, which makes sense.

Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •