Sure. Although, when one starts advocating violence, it becomes problematic.Originally Posted by ForeignRightist
Richard Spencer says things like: "‘Does human civilization actually need the Black race?’ ‘Is Black genocide right?’ and, if it is, ‘What would be the best and easiest way to dispose of them?". This is despicable but protected in the form of an essay. But what happens if he says similar things in front of a mob carrying torches? That's when things get iffy.
My assumption is that if someone calls for the death of someone else, that is still protected speech. The US take on this sort of thing is pretty absolute compared with other countries which we consider to be free, where the government can penalize some speech and other public expressions.
This is why I think the Freedom Census is completely wrong, many of the countries listed above America have hate speech laws which are the enemy of freedom. The problem is that while now it may be considered hate speech to spout racism etc... But the definition of what hate speech actually is can change leading to a downturn of what people will be allowed to say. This protects the media as well, imagine if the left pushes to have hate speech laws and someone else like Donald Trump gets elected. Anything hateful they say about the president would be punishable by law. It would be sort of ironic.
Last edited by Cable_Extreme; 01-05-18 at 12:40 PM.
The First Amendment doesn't say anything about agreeing with what anyone says or that you have to like it, only that you have the right to say it. It's one of the primary reasons colonialists broke away from England, to be able to speak out when they believed the government was enforcing unfair practices without being put in jail for it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote