It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Free Speech Protects ALL SPEECH Including hate Speech and Hate Speech Is Not a Hate Crime

page: 2
20
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Xianb
Hate Speech: is speech which attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender.


If the goal and purpose of the white supremacists is to completely take away Constitutional rights from certain groups of people then I think organizations designed to create a new government different than the one with Constitutional rights have to be treated differently. I don't think the white supremacists have the privilege to enjoy first amendment rights when their goals are to take away ALL rights of certain individuals. This is way beyond hate speech. This is sedition speech against our Constitution.


I agree the Democrats have succeeded in taking away rights with the Jim Crow Laws etc.,




posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Couldn't agree more. People shouldn't reflect any party or ideology views, they should exist to represent the majority of their constituents.

What do you think are the odds we will ever witness that?



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Couldn't agree more. People shouldn't reflect any party or ideology views, they should exist to represent the majority of their constituents.

What do you think are the odds we will ever witness that?

Almost absolute zero.

People need the support of having other people in the ideology just agree with their point, because it's in line with the parties platform. Just a shame, Americans used to be proud of individualism instead of afraid of it.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xianb

originally posted by: Gothmog
I understand free speech . But throughout history in this country , these types of groups have been condemned , their leaders hunted down , and caused to be ineffectual. Remember the First Amendment does not cover threats or violence against anyone. Hate Crimes are crimes and therefore not covered . By any Amendment . Under any condition.

I may not like what you have to say , but you have my honest oath to you I will defend your right to say it. Unless a person promotes a criminal act . In any form . Then they are on their own.
And may God help em , I damn sure wont.


And thats why we have the 2nd Amendment. The other Amendment the Left hates. The 2nd Prevents the Leaders from being hunted down.


No. No it doesnt. And never has.
The same applies to the Second as the First.
Read up on some history of the US sometimes...
You cannot go around threatening any folks and claim the 1st. Doesnt work that way




posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 10:49 PM
link   
I believe there can be hateful speech.
But that should not make it illegal because we can't start legislating emotions.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 10:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Xianb
Hate Speech: is speech which attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender.


If the goal and purpose of the white supremacists is to completely take away Constitutional rights from certain groups of people then I think organizations designed to create a new government different than the one with Constitutional rights have to be treated differently. I don't think the white supremacists have the privilege to enjoy first amendment rights when their goals are to take away ALL rights of certain individuals. This is way beyond hate speech. This is sedition speech against our Constitution.




Constitution of United States of America 1789 (rev. 1992)
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


This is the first amendment of the United States Constitution. The section I highlighted in bold is the important part in much of the recent events, and the upcoming event Saturday in Boston, Massachusetts. If an organization applies for a permit to peaceable assemble (for any reason), then they cannot be denied that ability. If the organization that applies for the permit, assures that those assembling under their organization will remain peaceful, they should be granted that permit.
However, the organizers are not responsible for the behavior of those that decide to gather to oppose them. If the opposing organization begins to become violent, then the role of the police is to intervene to stop the altercation. Screaming, swearing, or any other verbal assault is not enough to be considered violent behavior. It takes a physical act such as spitting (it is possible to transmit disease in that manner), throwing things, etc.. in that case. In addition, preventing someone from attending or blocking the venue is also not allowed.
This is the reason I have always advocated a peaceful counter-protest. That does not involve violent actions...."actions". Acceptable forms would be things such as:

  • shouting non violent slogans
  • presenting signs that do not promote violent actions
  • playing of loud music (within the local ordinances)
  • assembling with signs that when placed adjacent have the effect of surrounding the rally with a wall of words




Constitution of United States of America 1789 (rev. 1992)
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This is the first amendment of the United States Constitution. The section I highlighted in bold is the important part of this thread. If the event organizers state that their purpose is to peaceably assemble to petition the government to change, which could include abolishing the Constitution, that is acceptable as well and fully compliant with the Constitution.

That is how this works. This amendment protect the speech you disagree with to be openly expressed without fear of the government censoring or preventing it from being spoken.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Xianb

If colleges were truly the bastions of free speech and exchange and exposure to other ideas and perspectives, they would find a way to get these done. Claiming violence as the reason to shut down events means you can't seperate people with appropriate security? Give me a break. They could eaisly make protests where the two sides don't come in contact. Arrest those like OP stated. If you truly cared about Free Speech, you'd do whatever was needed to protect that speech.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

"your facts aren't convenient!"

Is what your can translate the comment aimed towards you citing law.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Hate speech is protected.

It should be.

The left should learn to organize peacefully and let the morons do their dumb things. Maybe by accident your umpa band is playing in a dorm near by.

However. These jokers are nuts. Let's not pretend their speech is worth hearing.

The violence is the indicator or direct threat intent like hey Jews if you vote tomorrow we are going to kill you.

On a side note why do these Nazis pick college towns. Why not go tell the people of South Chicago? In fact I would love to get a go fund me page and send then over to tel Aviv where they can March around and see what happens.
edit on 16-8-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Nothing in the realm of free speech obligates anyone else to listen.




posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: pavil

Yes. This is a major issue. It's like if you hear something bad your going to go insane and become bad. Or worse change your ideas. Oh my god I read a bill o'Reilly book now I hate blacks.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xianb

originally posted by: Dudemo5
Spencer has a right to believe and say what he wants. UF does not have a legal obligation to allow him to speak on their campus. Given the kind of whackadoos this guy's propaganda will tend to attract, fearing violence seems reasonable.


Yes they do. UF is a Government run Institution. Therefore they are censoring Free Speech.


You might want to take that one to court. If the university has a credible threat of violence, they can block the speaker. But ya never know, courts might rule in your favor. Knock yourself out.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

They are organizing a "free speech" rally this coming Saturday in Boston, the capitol of Massachusetts. One of the most liberal leaning states there is, and the heart of the American Revolution. This is not just a college town by any stretch. It is a major city that has has first hand experience with terrorist attacks. The police are on point for this one. They will be setting up a neutral zone (aka DMZ) between the two groups gathering (the free speech rally goers and their opposition protesters). I expect them to get this right and have minimal violent clashes as a result.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: luthier

Nothing in the realm of free speech obligates anyone else to listen.



Mind. Blown.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dudemo5

originally posted by: Xianb

originally posted by: Dudemo5
Spencer has a right to believe and say what he wants. UF does not have a legal obligation to allow him to speak on their campus. Given the kind of whackadoos this guy's propaganda will tend to attract, fearing violence seems reasonable.


Yes they do. UF is a Government run Institution. Therefore they are censoring Free Speech.


You might want to take that one to court. If the university has a credible threat of violence, they can block the speaker. But ya never know, courts might rule in your favor. Knock yourself out.


That has happened at another university venue for this same group.....they won and the university was forced by law to allow them to speak. That is a precedent they now have to present in this case if it gets to that point.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Dudemo5

originally posted by: Xianb

originally posted by: Dudemo5
Spencer has a right to believe and say what he wants. UF does not have a legal obligation to allow him to speak on their campus. Given the kind of whackadoos this guy's propaganda will tend to attract, fearing violence seems reasonable.


Yes they do. UF is a Government run Institution. Therefore they are censoring Free Speech.


You might want to take that one to court. If the university has a credible threat of violence, they can block the speaker. But ya never know, courts might rule in your favor. Knock yourself out.


That has happened at another university venue for this same group.....they won and the university was forced by law to allow them to speak. That is a precedent they now have to present in this case if it gets to that point.


Sweet! Someone pony up for lawyers!

Hopefully a gigantic riot doesn't break out. Then someone might sue the school for breach of safety protocols or something...

I mean, I'd be wearing a helmet.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

From there og. Boston is a white upper middle class utopia for the most part loaded with colleges. It's known for colleges. I want to see these morons go to a black town where people have nothing to lose and march up and down the street yelling how bad blacks are.

Boston has a capable police force, fbi forces, nsa, the whole deal.
edit on 16-8-2017 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:16 PM
link   
""Free Speech Protects ALL SPEECH INCLUDING HATE SPEECH AND HATE SPEECH IS NOT A HATE CRIME"

If you yell FIRE in a movie theater and there is no fire - They tell me that is a crime.


If you propose a philosophy which is against the basic principles of the Constitution of the the United States of America

- this is Treason - You are, in fact a terrorist - Your opposition to the priniciples of this country and all it stands for is the worst kind of crime

- And YOU should be held Lible for any and all crimes that you incite and cause!!!



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Krakatoa

From there og. Boston is a white upper middle class utopia for the most part loaded with colleges. It's known for colleges. I want to see these morons go to a black town where peiple have nothing to lose and march up and down the street yelling how bad blacks are.

Boston has a capable police force, fbi forces, nsa, the whole deal.


You've never been to Roxbury or Jamaica Plain have you.



posted on Aug, 16 2017 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

They are only different in that there is no premeditation.

Jaden



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join