The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on August 12, 2017, 12:36:57 PM
-
Le Gaucher (276 posts) https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029447897
Should hate speech be protected under first ammendment??
The courts have probably ruled for the case... But I really wonder whether the greater good is served by expressing such vitriol openly.
I think hate speech should be punishable not by jail or fine, but it should become a part of a persons criminal record that will allow employers to consider it before hiring the person.
Check it out... It's not a crime... but I want to destroy a person who does it. So typical leftist thought.
David__77 (17,048 posts)
1. What is hate speech?
Whatever the left chooses it to be.
snowybirdie (4 posts)
2. Hate speech is protected by the 1st Amendment
(except for yelling "fire" in a crowded theater). It's protected from government action, but not protected from the civil reaction to that speech. Sorry, but one man's hate speech is another man's rallying cry. Who decides?
yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded room isn't hate speech.
Star Member Pale Blue Dot (16,796 posts)
3. Of course it should unless you want speech like support for trans right labelled hate speech by the Christian Right (for instance).
The proper response to hate speech is to shame the speakers. They know that this is the most potent weapon against them, which is why so many of them are also "anti-PC" crusaders.
Star Member justhanginon (1,513 posts)
6. The problem always arises as to who gets to define "hate speech".
I'm sure many on the right would probably not agree with my definition since it would include many of, what I consider, their vile utterances and of course, in their opinion, on their side, vice versa.
Star Member The Velveteen Ocelot (53,379 posts)
7. The First Amendment protects all speech that isn't defamatory,
pornographic, or that directly incites violence. The problem with regulating or prohibiting hate speech is defining it. A lot of it is obvious (racial slurs, etc.), but there are some statements that are subject to interpretation, and might be categorized as hate speech by one court or administration and not by another. The law needs certainty and the definition of hate speech can't depend on the political slant of whoever is making the decision.
It would be absolutely unconstitutional to list "unpunished" (non-criminal) hate speech on a person's criminal record, because if it isn't defined as a crime it shouldn't be on a person's criminal record. That's effectively treating something as a crime, but without due process.
As far as having some sort of record for employers to review, a lot of people are doing it to themselves by posting racist or other hateful comments on their own Facebook pages or Twitter feeds or elsewhere on social media. The consequences of that are their own problem.
Star Member cyclonefence (741 posts)
16. "Nice" speech doesn't need protection
:thatsright:
-
Oh my.
.....As far as having some sort of record for employers to review, a lot of people are doing it to themselves by posting racist or other hateful comments on their own Facebook pages or Twitter feeds or elsewhere on social media. The consequences of that are their own problem.
It wasn't hate speech, but it was silly speech, what the now-gone retrowire primitive had said about his current employer.....and it's nice to see a primitive agreeing with franksolich, that the consequences are of the retrowire primitive's own doing.
-
When liberals are involved, the "nice" speech of today will inevitably become "hate" speech tomorrow.
Either all speech is protected by the 1st Amendment, or none of it is.
-
If hate speech were not protected and if it was a crime DU would be shut down and all the members sent to reeducation camps.
If it wasn't for hate speech libs and progressives would not have anything to say! :rant: :rant: :lmao: :lmao:
-
Star Member The Velveteen Ocelot (53,379 posts)
...
As far as having some sort of record for employers to review, a lot of people are doing it to themselves by posting racist or other hateful comments on their own Facebook pages or Twitter feeds or elsewhere on social media. The consequences of that are their own problem.
:rotf: Finding myself in agreement with TVO on something borders on traumatic, but I'll survive. Be that as it may ... :rotf:
:rotf: :lmao: TVO really should have mentioned posting @#$% on public discussion boards. I suppose it's easily inferred, but I think DU-folk would be disinclined to let their minds go there, especially given TVO's next sentence. She practically used the R-Word, "Responsible"! :lmao: :rotf:
-
Hate speech is subjective. One person who views it as hate speech is not hate speech to the other person.
-
Hate speech is subjective. One person who views it as hate speech is not hate speech to the other person.
Exactly which is why all speech is protected by the First Amendment.
-
David Burge @iowahawkblog
I'll let you ban hate speech if you'll let me define hate speech.
-
Oh my.
It wasn't hate speech, but it was silly speech, what the now-gone retrowire primitive had said about his current employer.....and it's nice to see a primitive agreeing with franksolich, that the consequences are of the retrowire primitive's own doing.
Oh my.
What a coincidence. Or perhaps not.
comment 3600:
https://conservativecave.com/cave/index.php/topic,81827.3600
It's too bad she's apparently got musical talents and is a primitive at the same time; usually such characteristics are mutually exclusive--so in her case, it's talents wasted.
-
If hate speech were not protected and if it was a crime DU would be shut down and all the members sent to reeducation camps.
If it wasn't for hate speech libs and progressives would not have anything to say! :rant: :rant: :lmao: :lmao:
I find it kind it kind of humorous that the dummies harp on hate speech and are the biggest perps of it. Dummies are incapable of looking even one day ahead to see what the consequence of their nirvana of the moment might entail.
-
Are people that rant every day how much they detest anyone that disagrees with them actually thinking they should determine what hate speech is?
-
Are people that rant every day how much they detest anyone that disagrees with them actually thinking they should determine what hate speech is?
Yes, and they think that we're stupid enough to allow that.
-
Exactly which is why all speech is protected by the First Amendment.
I would be accused of hate speech by many for being anti-rabbit.
-
I would be accused of hate speech by many for being anti-rabbit.
Hater!
The whole hate-speech, hate-crime, rape-culture, tolerance shtick (not an exhaustive list!) has never been anything more meaningful than rhetorical clubs for silencing non-Prog thoughts and speech.
-
the now-gone retrowire primitive had said about his current employer
I must have missed something interesting... what's the scoop ?
-
I must have missed something interesting... what's the scoop ?
https://conservativecave.com/cave/index.php/topic,115762.0
The primitive said nasty things about his employer; somehow, his employer found out.
The primitive didn't learn that some things are best left unsaid.
-
https://conservativecave.com/cave/index.php/topic,115762.0
The primitive said nasty things about his employer; somehow, his employer found out.
The primitive didn't learn that some things are best left unsaid.
Do we know he got canned? Or is that the current best guess?
-
https://conservativecave.com/cave/index.php/topic,115762.0
The primitive said nasty things about his employer; somehow, his employer found out.
The primitive didn't learn that some things are best left unsaid.
I do remember him bitching about his job, making him do stuff he thought was stupid, but still getting paid by the hour to do.
-
I do remember him bitching about his job, making him do stuff he thought was stupid, but still getting paid by the hour to do.
He was also beefing about being told that a year worth of his work had significant deficiencies, claiming he hadn't been properly trained, was being sabotaged, yada, yada, yada.
-
It's too bad she's apparently got musical talents and is a primitive at the same time; usually such characteristics are mutually exclusive--so in her case, it's talents wasted.
Frank, remember our old friend, Taverner? You should try experiencing the epic that is "Hitachi Dildo".
-
Frank, remember our old friend, Taverner? You should try experiencing the epic that is "Hitachi Dildo".
All that Taverner did in making that tripe was to prove that he is a "Hitachi Dildo." :whistling:
-
I would be accused of hate speech by many for being anti-rabbit.
That would include approximately 100% of all Lagomorph-Americans!
-
That would include approximately 100% of all Lagomorph-Americans!
I'm sure there are some lagomorph-guilt-ridden self-loathing lagomorphs out there, but for the rest, Dyslexic Lagomorphic Americans untie!
-
Yes, eom.