View Poll Results: Is 'hate speech' protected under the 1st Amendment?

Voters
51. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    46 90.20%
  • No

    1 1.96%
  • I don't know / Abstain / Other

    4 7.84%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 51 of 51

Thread: Is 'hate speech' protected under the 1st Amendment?

  1. #31
    Offensive speech is the only type of speech that needs First Amendment protection.

    "Politically popular speech has always been protected: even the Jews were free to say ‘Heil Hitler.’" - Isaac Asimov

    "Hate speech laws usually begin by targeting a few words that almost no one approves. Once the system for controlling and punishing “hate speech” is put into place, there is little or nothing to stop it from expanding to punish more and more types of everyday speech." - James Bovard
    "Let it not be said that we did nothing." - Dr. Ron Paul. "Stand up for what you believe in, even if you are standing alone." - Sophie Magdalena Scholl
    "War is the health of the State." - Randolph Bourne "Freedom is the answer. ... Now, what's the question?" - Ernie Hancock.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    This is an interesting topic and I hope this discussion stays on topic. If someone is blairing music infront of my house when I'm trying to sleep can I call the police about a noise complaint or would that he violating their freedom of speech? What about threats are they protected by the first amendment?



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikezelot View Post
    This is an interesting topic and I hope this discussion stays on topic. If someone is blairing music infront of my house when I'm trying to sleep can I call the police about a noise complaint or would that he violating their freedom of speech? What about threats are they protected by the first amendment?
    My son has been taught NEVER to call the kops, for any reason.

    The simple fact that you would entertain the notion speaks loudly.

    Be a man and handle it, or don't, but for Heavens sake don't look to government to be a man in your stead.

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by willwash View Post
    I abstain because I do not acknowledge "hate" speech as a category of speech, therefore I cannot vote either way on whether it is protected. It's like asking if unicorns like to eat carrots.
    Unicorns like carrots.

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    My son has been taught NEVER to call the kops, for any reason.

    The simple fact that you would entertain the notion speaks loudly.

    Be a man and handle it, or don't, but for Heavens sake don't look to government to be a man in your stead.
    Yell at them
    The most important element of a free society, where individual rights are held in the highest esteem, is the rejection of the initiation of violence.

    RON PAUL







  8. #36
    ALL speech is protected. The 1A is an all-or-nothing deal for reasons one would hope were crystal clear. That it has been interpreted away by the courts to what is now effectively a state-given privilege... well, you know.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Mikezelot View Post
    If someone is blairing [sic] music infront [sic] of my house when I'm trying to sleep can I call the police about a noise complaint or would that he violating their freedom of speech?
    The issue is not the speech itself (music), but the method of delivery given a circumstance where one man's right to play that music conflicts with another's right to sleep peaceably in his own home.

    ALL speech is protected. That said, the issue of conflict arises when the manner of speech violates another's rights. This should be clear to all. Such violations do NOT, however, include butthurt. When someone says something that "upsets" another, onus lies with the recipient to deal with the utterances like a big boy. For example, if a man refers to a woman as a "stupid $#@!", it is completely on the woman if she is "offended" by this. Racial epithets, ethnic slurs, and so forth are all the same insofar as responsibilities for butthurt are concerned.

    The only utterances that are exceptions to this general rule are those that constitute "assault". If I tell you that I am going to kill you, it is well within your right to take action to preempt my stated intention to physically attack and harm you. Either way, I do not believe police have too much valid cause to interject themselves into such matters, much less the prosecutorial machinery of the "state".

    What about threats are they protected by the first amendment?
    IMO, yes they are. Equally protected, however, is my right to draw a pistol and shoot the ghost from your retarded self if you so threaten me, such words constituting legal "assault". Context is, of course, important. If one's older brother says "I'm gonna kill you" in the ways traditional, there would be no basis for gunplay or other acts of violence against the utterer. But when circumstance allows for credibility of the perceived threat, anything goes as far as I am concerned. That is why I am a really big advocate of taking great care with one's words because they are very, VERY important. That we discount them into such cheapness by statute and government policy is a great shame upon us all. They have driven the common man into ever less wise habits of comportment in the presence of their fellows, which is why we are rushing toward the realization of a culture as depicted in "Idiocracy". As human stupidity becomes codified into "law" and men with guns act to enforce the infantility that arises therefrom, the population makes rapid its descent to that ever diminishing denominator. And that, my friends, is precisely what is happening in America right now as I type these sorrow-laden words.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  10. #38
    All of my speech is protected .

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    All of my speech is protected .
    Yeah but those treaties cost you a lot of valuable peyote growing land.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Ron Paul know some weird people too.



    Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!


    Short Income Tax Video

    The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes

    The Federalist Papers, No. 15:

    Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.

  12. #40
    Speech is protected unless it's hurtful or mean or violates anyone's safe space
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Rand Paul (Vice Pres) 2016!!!!



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    ALL speech is protected. The 1A is an all-or-nothing deal for reasons one would hope were crystal clear. That it has been interpreted away by the courts to what is now effectively a state-given privilege... well, you know.
    Defamation and fraudulent misrepresentations were never intended to be protected by 1A.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Danke View Post
    Yeah but those treaties cost you a lot of valuable peyote growing land.
    My people signed no treaties , I still claim the land . All I have to do is patiently wait until everyone is too fat, dumb and lazy to resist and then I can expel them. Pc. of cake, the time could be near, LOL

  16. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    Speech is protected unless it's hurtful or mean or violates anyone's safe space
    I didn't take you for a special snowflake!!

  17. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    I didn't take you for a special snowflake!!
    We all deserve love and respect.

    (except illegals and muslims)
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Rand Paul (Vice Pres) 2016!!!!

  18. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    We all deserve love and respect.

    (except illegals and muslims)
    That's how it was back in the day...(but with no exceptions.) It's not about being "politically correct"...it's about not being rude. If you don't have anything nice to say, STFU.

  19. #46
    The first amendment means the government can't stop you from stupidity, but they don't necessarily protect you from the consequences of your stupidity, either. If you decide to say something inappropriate, then don't call the police when the object of your stupidity punches you in the mouth.
    "There are two freedoms - the false, where a man is free to do what he likes; the true, where he is free to do what he ought."~~Charles Kingsley

  20. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    Defamation and fraudulent misrepresentations were never intended to be protected by 1A.
    Point taken. I only zeroed in on threats and neglected to include these.

    However, I would have to think on "defamation". Is it a crime? Perhaps, perhaps not. It is fodder for civil action in any event.

    Fraud is a crime, which of course would render it unprotected.

    Now that I'm thinking of it, is assault a crime? Not sure, but thinking perhaps not. If I threaten you, is it not up to you to choose your response?

    ETA: upon further consideration, fraudulent speech actually IS protected. It is the acting in accord with the speech that is criminal. Spinning yarns is fraud of a sort, but is no crime.
    Last edited by osan; 06-21-2016 at 06:40 PM.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  21. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Now that I'm thinking of it, is assault a crime? Not sure, but thinking perhaps not. If I threaten you, is it not up to you to choose your response?

    ETA: upon further consideration, fraudulent speech actually IS protected. It is the acting in accord with the speech that is criminal. Spinning yarns is fraud of a sort, but is no crime.
    Realize that the "no law" referred to in 1A covers civil law in addition to criminal law. For example, the Supreme Court ruled decades ago that 1A bars a public figure from recovering for defamation in a civil suit unless he can prove the defendant acted with malice or reckless disregard for the truth.

    In the Anglo-American legal system assault has been a crime and the basis for a civil suit for about 700 years. The basis for it is that one shouldn't be put in fear for his safety -- e.g., if I swing a baseball bat at your head with the intent of knocking your brains all over the floor but I miss, it's still an assault.

    Regarding fraud, it's not necessary that the person making the fraudulent statement take any further action, although in many cases he may, such as a used car salesman lying about a lemon he sells to someone. But suppose a public company puts out phony reports about its condition (think Enron) and someone buys its stock on the open market in reliance on the reports. The company has committed fraud even though it took no further action after making its statement.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    In the Anglo-American legal system assault has been a crime and the basis for a civil suit for about 700 years. The basis for it is that one shouldn't be put in fear for his safety
    Point taken.
    Through lives and lives shalt thou pay, O' king.

    Pray for reset.


  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    My son has been taught NEVER to call the kops, for any reason.

    The simple fact that you would entertain the notion speaks loudly.

    Be a man and handle it, or don't, but for Heavens sake don't look to government to be a man in your stead.
    A great point to hammer home, and that's one way to put it. I used to call the cops, and I still have family and friends that see calling the cops as some sort of solution -I offer my advice on the matters of police as they come up and thoroughly take them through each step of what exactly is happening.
    (note to self: stay off of tod evans' grass) Another way to put it is:

    Take the best course of honest action, while not supporting the aggression of others.

    What is "manly" about it IMO, is simply stripping away any illusion that poor ideas are going to be any kind substitute for an honest action requiring human contact.
    Honest interaction between humans, is not what the current government machine promotes, thus, the state wants you to call it's agents All. The. Time.
    Call an uncle, call a neighbor, call anyone for help, but don't call the state.

    On Topic-

    The fact that there is a discussion about hate speech and the first amendment tells me that the 1st has not been protected.
    Speech is ideas in a tangible medium. Love is an idea, hate of someone, or some thing is an idea.

    The state promotes bad ideas, and not surprisingly, the state wants to tell you which ideas are "bad".

    The 1st is selectively protected, by an institution that has no honest use for it.
    Fear of man will prove to be a snare, but whoever trusts in the LORD is kept safe. Proverbs 29:25
    "I think the propaganda machine is the biggest problem that we face today in trying to get the truth out to people."
    Ron Paul

    Please watch, subscribe, like, & share, Ron Paul Liberty Report
    BITCHUTE IS A LIBERTY MINDED ALTERNATIVE TO GOOGLE SUBSIDIARY YOUTUBE

  25. #51
    The problem with restricting hate speech is that various authoritarian groups can define and re define it to mean anything they disagree with whether said opinions are truly hateful or not. Protecting hate speech does mean that bigots will be free to express bigoted opinions, but that is a small price to pay for being able to express controversial ideas and opinions that may in fact actually express good ideas.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

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