Your Personal Definition Of Hate Speech

Dragonfly said:

What's the definition of a "threat" then?

Does a verbal threat of violence, without any actual physical violence, justify a violent response?

Click to expand...

I am qiuite surprised by your comments. Do you realise that hate speech does not necessarily engineer an immediate violent response by the listner. Nor does it threaten the listener. The best practioners of it know better than to direct it at its intended victims. In fact the best use of hate speech is not to threaten with violence but to threaten with fear.

Hate speech is not just verbally abusing someone that is just someone being angry and violent. Any fool can do that.

I would suggest you google up some of goebbels speeches if you want a good example of hate speech. You will note he does not address the jews but instead the germans. You will also note that he does not incite violence against the jews. he instead gives the germans reason to fear and hate the jews. And then lets those emotions follow the natural course towards violence to the jews.

There is a big diference between verbally abusing someone to the point where they want to hit you and manipulating people to hatred towards others. The latter is hate speech, the former is just someone being a dick.

truthatallcost said:

Click to expand...

What??!!? You don't want to be a rock star? :2razz: :lol:

X Factor said:

Threats with along with an apparent ability and/or demonstrated intent to follow through.

Click to expand...

To further clarify.. with motivation being something like race/religion/gender/orientation/etc...

Cephus said:

No such thing. Freedom of expression is far more important than hurt feelings. People need to grow up.

Click to expand...

thw world never grows up because of people who can not use their right hemisphere

Dragonfly said:

Keeping the First Amendment in mind:

What kinds of things could another person speak/shout to/at you, that in your opinion, would "justify" a violent response?

Click to expand...

"I'm going to kill or harm you." And out has to be a credible threat.

Dragonfly said:

Keeping the First Amendment in mind:

What kinds of things could another person speak/shout to/at you, that in your opinion, would "justify" a violent response?

Click to expand...

The title of your thread asks one question. Then what you say asks another. I suggest that you try making up your mind. As for the title of your thread. My definition of hate speech is that which those who deserve to be hated don't want spoken. Another definition is anything a forum won't allow to be spoken. As for the second question you ask, only a personal insult directed at you deserves a violent response. But if you are part of a group being insulted, any insult, directed at you or not, can't be taken personally.