Top | Newest First | Oldest First
Straylight · 31-35, F
If you say people have free speech except for this, then they dont really have free speech. And once you have a legal definition for protected and non protected speech, then freedom of speech is over.
Carver · 31-35, F
@Straylight Impressive. I always took you as someone who would agree with the leftist ideology to ban "hate speech".
Straylight · 31-35, F
@Carver I'm a libertarian, I dont believe and restricting freedoms. Its a slippery slope.
Carver · 31-35, F
@Straylight 👍️
It does exist, not legally by definition but it is often referred to as such when one person or group comments negatively on another person or group. But then it is protected under the 1st Amendment. It probably changes drastically when the speech incites, encourages or is responsible for violence, mayhem and the cost of injury or fatality to others, which may be looked at and responded to as "terroristic threats". There is a very fine line which under "hate speech", might morph into terroristic threats, or be so considered.
Carver · 31-35, F
@soar2newhighs I believe there is such a thing as hate speech but I don't believe it should be legally defined and banned. Especially considering the term is more often applied to opinions one doesn't agree with that aren't inherently hateful in any way.
SheikYerbouti · 51-55, M
Hate speech laws are bad to begin with. Anything you say to someone else can be construed as "hate".
Straylight · 31-35, F
@SheikYerbouti Yes, it's not hard to imagine someone crying hate speech over hearing an opposing opinion.
SheikYerbouti · 51-55, M
@Straylight It's done on college campuses so frequently.
Classified · M
Probably there has never been a majority willing to define it.
If one would want to try that, I think it's easy to be accused of wanting to apply censorship.
If one would want to try that, I think it's easy to be accused of wanting to apply censorship.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment