ForeignRightist
Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2017
- Messages
- 120
- Reaction score
- 58
- Location
- 665 miles off the East Coast
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
To be honest I am surprised I haven't seen any other posts about this.
Brandenbyrg V. Ohio set the precedent that hate speech is indeed still considered an exercise of freedom of speech assuming it does not result in violence.
So what do you, the people of DP think?
Does the First Amendment protect the rights of those saying things others deem hateful, if so, why, if not, why not?
Brandenbyrg V. Ohio set the precedent that hate speech is indeed still considered an exercise of freedom of speech assuming it does not result in violence.
So what do you, the people of DP think?
Does the First Amendment protect the rights of those saying things others deem hateful, if so, why, if not, why not?