Originally posted by jfj123
Originally posted by JensLekman
Originally posted by skeptic1
Originally posted by ngchunter
Originally posted by skeptic1
I am all for free speech, but not for hate speech.
Then you are not for free speech. It's easy to defend speech you at least perceive as "nice." It takes integrity to defend speech you vehemently
disagree with because it's the right thing to do, not because you support it.
I support free speech and I will fight for it.
I don't support hate speech, but as long it is free, I will fight for it, too.
Hate speech adds nothing to society. It drives people apart, and does nothing to bring them together. But, it is still covered under free speech.
So, I will fight for it even though I see no use in it.
What are you defining hate as? To say it adds nothing is a bit of a misnomer when, although it may be crude in its delivery, there may be a
legitimate reason behind it.
If a white person were to say they are afraid of black people because they are disproportionately victimized by them, which is an indisputable fact,
is that hateful? At what point are statistical facts considered hate? If that fear makes them not want to be around them, is that unreasonable? I
don't know, and either do you. We can't just assign values to people and then berate them when they don't live up to them, which is what I believe
you're proposing we do.
As example,
If you beat a black man and the motive is that you hate him, that constitute a hate crime.
Does that help?
Again, the legislation does not include limiting speech to protected classes.
For example, you can say you don't like black people all day and give reasons why, which may even be racist, and nothing will happen to you
legally.
[edit on 7-4-2009 by jfj123]
If you're asking for my personal opinion, the fact that you're beating someone is enough to warrant a severe punishment, the motive should be
irrelevant unless in the case of self defense.
As a Criminologist however, I know that the majority of victims in violent inter-racial crime are white. However, the majority of people charged with
hate crimes are white. The legislation was created from a moral panic, and thus, begins to encompass so called "criminals" that it was never
intended for. I take hate crime laws for what they are, the product of one or two brutal racially motivated crimes and societies over-reaction to a
sad, but extremely rare, event.
My worry stems from the fact that I believe we're heading in the direction where we won't be able to discuss anything related to race, sexuality,
etc... for fear of offending someone or, maybe one day, criminal prosecution.
[edit on 7-4-2009 by JensLekman]
[edit on 7-4-2009 by JensLekman]