Is hate speech free speech? Should hate speech be illegal?

Question

Please vote. It would be nice to explain what your state's laws says about it. In my country hate speech is illegal but police does not really take care of it in my experience since they have to take care about other many cases. Please be nice and do not insult anyone. Vote please as i said. I am going to use this poll for another question.

RolandCuthbert · Accepted Answer

Hate speech has always been free speech. But most folks here don't understand. Free speech does not protect you from being fired, losing clients, memberships, or from other people expressing their freedom of speech.

But I don't think most folks here work. Or at least work in a corporate environment.

OddBeMe · Accepted Answer

The ACLU infamously represented the KKK. Germany has really strict hate speech laws and it’s inspired some really horrible political parties. So yes, hate speech is free speech.

ADFSDF1996 · Answer

What is hate speech? The leftists label anything they disagree with as “hate speech”.

Whether something is hate speech or not shouldn’t be illegal. Of course you shouldn’t yell “bomb!” in a airplane, it’s common sense.

But if someone yells out “Heil Hitler!” Who cares?

LaFerrari · Answer

Whether you like it or not, hate speech such as Black supremacy, White supremacy, Neo Nazi, NFAC, Anti trans, Anti gay, Anti Police, Anti government speech is free speech until there are threats made, then its considered illegal. But I've seen time after time on the news or articles of people flying Nazi flags in their neighborhoods or confederate flags, though its offensive to most people, its not illegal, and most times people show up to protest those people, which is also not illegal until there are threats or violence. Seen here:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/6BrRGPQSfPw

Or there are times where people will invoke a reaction such as the guy who painted his house a rainbow to combat Westboro Baptist Church and their hatred, Which is also legal to do depending on HOA policy, but in law terms its legal. See here:

https://www.youtube.com/embed/s8gwagpj1J4

But speaking of modern times, especially in America, there is no such thing as freedom of speech anymore, Multi billion dollar corporations are censoring peoples speech like Pro leftist social media platforms against right wing supporters, or vise versa... Say someone says hate speech on video on one of those platforms, they will be canceled by the mobs of people that watch, they will be fired from their jobs, barred from any other future careers and harassed for the rest of their lives, which has happened to many times.

Is hate speech free speech? Should hate speech be illegal?

Every single person in the west gets offended by anything these days, And its not necessarily hate speech either, you can get canceled for anything these days, whether you're left wing or right wing or have no political stance. You may say something that offends one person that isn't hate speech or political, then an entire group of people hop on the bandwagon and makes a deal out of it. Kind of like this...

The media made a frenzy out of Donald Trump's 3 year old grandson building and gifting a LEGO White house to Trump. How is this political? and why did the MEDIA make a massive frenzy out of a child's gift? well simple... Trumps name sells... People especially on the left LOVE Drama, You should see the comments on the post... its nothing but hatred towards a 3 year old and Trump...

https://www.youtube.com/embed/jhcgmwj3NAc

The Left Media even aired this and protected Biden from this comment being made, but we both know if trump had said something like that, it would be a feeding frenzy among the left. (by the way I'm not political, I'm not left or right, or middle, I'm just calling out the hypocrisy.)

Now getting to the question "Should hate speech be illegal?" Well its hard to decide this, Who is going to monitor what is hate speech and what is considered not? Its not as simple as you think it may be. Should racism be illegal? Yes, but you're not going to stop millions of people from being racist, Just like you can't stop millions of people from drinking, they will find ways around it... just sayin...

CrazyGirl2 · Answer

In the United States, thanks to our 1st amendment, free speech is absolute! It has to be or there is no fee speech at all! Now, free speech and a “Call to action” are extremely different things! Whenever you here someone say “oh yeah, we’ll you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater!” Well actually you 100% can, IF the theater is actually on fire! However by yelling “fire” in a crowded theater where no fire exists, you are calling everyone to action! You are in effect saying “everyone get out as quickly as possible” well that is highly likely to cause someone an injury. So IF there was no fire and you made that call to action, you would be criminally and civilly liable for the damages you caused! The same is true of so called hate speech! I am Jewish, so I will use Jewish slurs in my example to avoid any false claims of MY using hate speech! Look, as far as I’m concerned, I would MUCH rather you come right out and say “god, I fucking hate kikes” RIGHT TO MY FACE! because now I know to absolutely avoid you. Rather than have you smile at me, tell me how great you think I am, and as soon as I leave THEN say “god I fuckin” hate that kike bitch” is it HATE speech? Well it’s definitely hateful, but you DO have every right to offend under the constitution! As one Supreme Court Justice once said… “ Nobody ever needed a constitutional right to say nice things which everyone agrees with!” He went on…” it is the things which offend, which cause distress, the very things which one would go out of one’s way to prevent other’s from saying, that require constitutional protection! As distasteful as we may find certain things, our founders were clear in their intent when they wrote “congress shall make NO law abridging the rights of freedom of the press, of religion, and yes of speech” Yet you wish us to sit here today and effectively make a law which does precisely that… abridge the freedom of speech of someone with whom YOU sir, disagree” I m paraphrasing, but that was the absolute gist of what was said! It’s already a crime to beat someone up! Does it really matter if you beat me because you just don’t like ME, or you beat me up because you don’t like jews? As long as you serve you time for unjustly attacking me, I am satisfied. I would prefer that the government stick to the facts at hand, and convict on the battery, instead of assuming the role of God, and looking into the heart of the criminal to ascertain if I was beaten because the perpetrator doesn’t like me, or was I beaten because the perpetrator doesn’t like any Jews! We step into dangerous territory when we allow or even expect judges to read into a simple battery, the contents of the assailants heart at the moment of the attack! You can say whatever you like, as long as you don’t point at me, and yell there’s a Jew… GET HER!!! Because THAT is a call to action, and that (as we’ve established) is NOT speech at all! Anyway m I sincerely hope I added some meaningful thought to this discussion!

Dragonpurple · Answer

Europe doesn't have freedom of speech, I don't know where you live but in the USA hate speech is free speech.

The only restrictions on free speech is the fire in a theater, or causing a panic that could get others hurt. It is actually really hard to use free speech to hurt others. As others also have a responsibility to how they perceive that speech. Much like getting offended, people choose to get offended, no one can make anyone get offended.

The real problem with saying hate speech should be illegal is WHO GETS TO DECIDE what is hate speech? Person A could think something isn't hate speech, person B thinks it is.

Then there would be situations where Person A thinks something is Hate speech and Person B doesn't think it is... but the law says it isn't hate speech. Who is right?

Hate speech is quite the variable, no way to get everyone to think something is hateful across the board... example I can hate what Democrats say and think every time they say raise taxes it should be illegal, I hate that. Should that be illegal, after all I am fearful they will and hate what they are talking about.

Thing is people cannot even agree on what exactly hate speech is. Some think if you say something and it makes them feel bad, that is hate speech.

Shizunk · Answer

Apart from the obvious danger with driving actual hatred underground where it can't be seen or opposed, the whole point of free speech is to say unpopular things. If you ban certain words, people will just work around that creatively and still say whatever they meant to say. If you go broadly and let some select group of people define what they think is dangerous or hateful, you ultimately end up with the ministry of truth, and purges of opposing views. That is unacceptable. We see how increasingly people label anything they disagree with as racism or other isms. There is only s short step from that to silencing your opposition with claims that they hate someone and speak against that group, even if those claims are provably untrue. Platforms are routinely banning people for "terrorism" when they mention something about covid for example. Giving such internet inquisition more tolls to bully everyone into compliance is absolutely the worst thing we could do in that situation.
I don't know what the laws say in my country, but in reality nobody cares much about problematic speech, we just criticize and oppose it. And that's how it should be. Even the communist party was never banned with the rationale that we need to let them speak and criticize them to oblivion, otherwise they would just rename themselves and get more sneaky but their goals and methods would not change. Guess what, they kept bleeding votes, and this year was the first time they simply didn't make it to parliament at all due to lack of support.

Lliam · Answer

Those who support limits on speech fail to foresee the consequences of allowing legislation on speech. Any legislation is a slippery slope that will inevitably lead to greater and greater control and abuse. Only authoritarians and totalitarians will benefit.

Speech, even hate speech, is an opportunity to learn. It's better to know what someone is thinking.

Hurting someone's feelings should not be a crime. There is always someone who will take offense at anything. People should be free to disagree.

The big question is always, "Who will decide what is hateful?" Fuck the deciders.

I strongly oppose any form of censorship. Let people decide for themselves whether or not to agree or disagree, or even whether or not to tune out. Let people whine all they want about things they consider to be offensive. Or better yet, if they are half way intelligent, they will form convincing rebuttals. That's what I meant when I originally talked about opportunities to learn.

I am often offended by things people say "but I will defend to the death their right to say them."

Credible threats are something different.

DJB72 · Answer

I'm incredulous at how incomprehensibly dumb Americans are when they talk about "freedom" and "rights"

They insist everyone has the "right" to bear arms because of the 2nd Amendment. They don't grasp that with that "right" comes a "responsibility" to ensure the most vulnerable in society are protected. Yet the majority of mass shootings in the USA take place in schools. So many in fact that they don't always make international news any more.

"Freedom" if speech is the same. Your "right" to say anything you want to ends at the point it causes harm.

I have the right to buy a Scots Claymore. A double-handed broadsword. I have the right to wield it freely - until it can strike someone else. At that point, my "right" to freedom of expression through movement is superceded by the second person's Right to Life - an actual Human Right, not some Americans only "right".

Life. Clean water. Adequate nutrition. These are actual Human Rights. Carrying a gun isn't a right it's a privilege. The fact that some people can be banned from having one, even in America is proof positive that it's not a "right".

The same applies to speech.

The pandemic would likely be over now if it was understood that just because someone can say something, that doesn't mean it's something that should be broadcast to half the global population via the internet.

No. Hate speech is not free speech.

Kaneki05 · Answer

I don't agree with most censorship so nope it shouldn't be illegal. The problem with censorship is only 0.01% of it will actually be justified. The rest would be just be it's censored for the sake of it and the argument for why is completely daft to anyone who has a brain.

I don't remember it's name, but a book was banned in America for portraying some i think it was commie views or anti government something something. But this ban was daft 100% so much so even south park did an episode on it.
And the joke was the kids were confused why it was even banned. Because anyone in there right mind could tell there was no reason to.
But the American government thought it best, they were a prime example of why censorship would just ban things for no reason or politically motivated, And not justified at all.

It's the same with all forms of censorships, films been censored or banned or need some blood been taken out for no reason. It is and will be the same with hate speech.
Like we cannot say bad things about Catholics no more cause that's hate speech, welp there goes half stand up acts in the world. There goes freedom of saying bad things about religion online.
That's just an example for myself. I am sure some would love atheists not been able to do such things. But that's the point as well too subjective.
Unlike a proper crime of assault or something.

globetrotter22 · Answer

So let’s say we make “hate speech” illegal. Then who gets to decide what is and what is not “hate speech”. Social media platforms already have shown a very clear partisan bias on this.

Take for example the Wuhan lab leak. In summer of 2020 Facebook and other social media platforms placed “possible misinformation” warnings on posts about the lab leak. Everybody was supposed to he believe that patient zero was some gross fool who ate a raw bat in a Wuhan wet market. As it turns out there is now hard evidence that the Wuhan lab leak was very possible.

There is a difference between me saying “we should kill all purple colored Arabian Jews living in DC” (satire) vs. “purple Jews living in DC are morons and responsible for most violent crimes”. One is a direct call to violence. The other while racist and “hate speech” is NOT a legitimate threat.

But banning free speech has been done and is being done in many parts of the world. It’s been abused to oppress people and creates an actual worse society. The better thing is to let the idiot run his mouth so you know who he is AND use free speech to call him out.

BCA6010 · Answer

"hate speech" is a subjective term in actual practice, and more often than not makes one look like a power-hungry idiot when they focus on it too heavily. This is proven by the way the term gets thrown around, which is almost entirely one-sided and often accompanied by equally or even more vicious language as an attempt to shut down opposition.

There should be little to no limits on the freedom to voice your opinions, with really the only exceptions being when actively attempting to incite physical violence against others. I voted "A" because it's closer to my argument, and doesn't warrant an "other."

Subarugirl · Answer

Hate speech is defined by the Cambridge Dictionary as "public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation". Hate speech is "usually thought to include communications of animosity or disparagement of an individual or a group on account of a group characteristic such as race, colour, national origin, sex, disability, religion, or sexual orientation". A legal definition of hate speech varies from country to country.

In the United States, unless it crosses the line and becomes incitement, fighting words or a “true threat,” hate speech is protected by the First Amendment

Nomina · Answer

Free speech is the ability to say whatever you want, even if it is hateful. I never really understood the concept of hate speech to begin with and that it should be illegal. If someone says something I don't like, even find hurtful, it has always been up to me to either tell them I don't appreciate it or work through the emotions and eventually move on. It's emotional maturity.

None of that is a thing in my country. I don't even think we have specific speech laws, it's never come up. People say whatever they want and whoever gets hurt by what's said, gets over it. It actually helps people. They grow a thicker skin, they aren't as affected by what is said and they learn to dish it back out.

doopayo · Answer

There’s no legal definition of hate speech.

However, hate speech isn’t protected by freedom of speech as hate speech always insights violence/spreads misinformation towards a demographic of people which can insight violence against said people. Which can classify the majority of hate speech under the label
conspiracy, false speech, and or inciting a felony crime of violence.

All of which are criminal offenses. I believe this is completely fine, it’s the same thing as if you go on social media and say you’re going to murder someone. Or have the intention of murdering someone. Even though you technically haven’t committed a crime there’s the intent of committing a crime/inciting a crime/and or promotion of violence which is dangerous

Belgie · Answer

Free speech is inviolable. If you allow the government to decide what is hate speech, dissent can be classed as hate speech.

There are already people who claim to be on the left who for various reasons want to silence/cancel voices just because of "offence". Fuck those people.

Smashingdoozy · Answer

I think a lot of people think hate speech is like "I don't like you so fuck you" or something like that, very insignificant when in reality it's defined as "abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice against a particular group, especially on the basis of race, religion, or sexual orientation."

Hate speech is not free speech, free speech is about having open discussion hate speech is closed off and well hateful... When you permit hate speech you're restricting the free speech of someone else.

Anyways I've written and read speech so much that it now doesn't look like a word. ☺️

BeenThereLovedIt · Answer

Speech has boundaries. You can't yell "fire" in a movie theater, nor can you scream "terrorist" in an airport with exception to the literal definition that there really is a fire or terrorist lol.

Inciting a mob has always been at the top of that list as well.

So using hate speech to incite a mob in real life vs. using hate speech to incite a mob over the internet is different how?

It's not the speech that needs to be considered illegal, but the speaker needs to be held responsible for the outcomes of their proclamations.

Stoner710 · Answer

Hate speech is free speech it’s not nice beach I’ll give you that but we need to understand that the first amendment does protect hate speech you can say anything you want as long as it’s not libelous or slanderous I know many people don’t like this but hate speech is protected by the First Amendment you cannot live with somebody says there’s nothing wrong with that if somebody says the N-word you might have the ride to cuss them out get in their face that kind of thing however it is protected by the First Amendment and there’s nothing we can do about it

ODC2112 · Answer

Crimes of opinion are the historical residue of crimes against religion and the majesty of the Sovereigns.

The French politician and Revolutionary, Maximilien de Robespierre defined crimes of opinion as imaginary crimes in the Discours sur la liberté de la presse, pronounced at the Club of the Jacobins on 11 May 1791.

It is right to severely punish discrimination, when it has physical relevance, the criminal law of a democratic state is based on facts, not words.

Opinion crimes are invoked by both political parties. Religious people treat opinion crimes as crimes against blasphemy. Jesus Christ was crucified for a crime of opinion, for the Sanhedrin he was blasphemous.

The new religions of the American left of the good and just of Nietzcheian memory, see blasphemy in everything that is contrary to their religions, in the same way as the people of the right.

Puppystarfish23 · Answer

How can you define hate speech. People should be able to speak there mind wether or not it may upset people. The truth hurts sometimes and if we don't have free speech you'll stopping the people who are wrong from showing flaws in the opinion. If we lose free speech we might as well all move to North Korea

shortster · Answer

What is the point of having freedom of speech if not to protect offensive speech? Because what you find offensive I may find to be essential. You might like the government silencing your political opponents; but what happens when they become the government. An non-offensive language needs no protection.

EmbraceThePain · Answer

Hate speech should be legal.

If your speech doesn’t call for people to assault the White House and kill occupants of it, then it is protected speech.

Hate speech is not something that is positive and can hurt people’s feelings, but it should be allowed in a free country/society. People should be free to say good and bad things, granted it stays within a legal framework (can’t yell fire in a building, when there is no fire).

If you have controversial things to say about the president, women, men, religion, etc.

You should be able to say it. Some people may not like what you have to say, but tough.

They’ll have to find their own way of dealing with you or just ignore you altogether.

jshm2 · Answer

Free speech and hate speech are polar opposites. Free speech is only such as long as it falls within the law. Hate speech is among many categories that falls outside the law.

Hence you could say there is no such thing as free speech. You only ever can have free speech within the laws you live in.

Thus you could be arrested and jailed for saying something in another country that you could be used to saying in your own. It is not up to the laws to protect you, but up to you to be aware of the laws.

Ninani · Answer

It's a slippery slope. Who defines hate speech and where's the limit? Censoring something as hate speech is impossible as language can be used in creative ways to get a message across. Do you censor specific words, sentences, the intent behind and how do you measure that? It's impossible.

Mango-man · Answer

"Free speech" means the right to speak, however it doesn't "free someone from consequences" of their speech.

So sure, people are free to speak about whatever they want (even lying or being offensive and rude), however they must be ready to accept the consequences if they break any laws while using their freedom to speak.
The same way the right to drive car doesn't provide protection form consequences if they hit someone.

purplepoppy · Answer

Its is a question of what was the intent of the speech you. gave. if the intent is to encourage discrimination against a group or is likely to lead harm/violence then it crosses the line between free speech and hate speech.
For example I may not agree with your religion and I should be free to criticise it and say why another is better. What I shouldn't be allowed to do is harass/abuse you or enrage others to the point your at physical risk

horsenrhinounicorn · Answer

If someone hates murder and a famous person commits murder, those who witnessed it should have the right to tell the community about the injustice in a peaceful manner. The Laws don’t solve the problem. We have to get to the root cause of the hate itself and the preventive measures that protect others from both physical and verbal abuse. For if we do not resolve the root cause, the problem will be too big for law enforcement to restore the peace within the land.

GaGirls · Answer

Illegal it should not be. Think Socrates. Courtesy for others is a big part of having a pleasing personality. Most people fail to develop sufficient courtesy. It is a mighty tool. Courtesy fixes the issue for normal people. For racist and those alike a change in belief through science is needed.

humpbackjack · Answer

It’s a slippery slope because free speech is supposed to mean just that freedom to speak what’s on your mind of course purposely in sighting a riot is and should be illegal but I imagine there’s possibly a lot of grey area on the subject ultimately though with governments it seems if you give them an inch they’re going to take a mile and your tape measure so they can keep on taking miles

tilmyheadblows · Answer

free speech comes with the cost of the reaction of your peers. you should be able to say anything you want, but you have to accept that anyone can say anything they want back

legalboxers · Answer

ahh triggered Trumpanzees. So you would shout "FIRE" at an all-you-can-eat buffet so you can have all that shrimp since you can't afford it working for your Uncle Cletus at the Ammo and Bait and Tackle Shop. Or all those Buffalo Wings.. Yee-HAW...
#FDT

Bogoboj · Answer

Hate speech IS free speech!
The question then should be "is all free speech protected by the law or should we make laws to protect some free speech and make laws to punish other forms of free speech"

I don't think this is a good idea because people can debate till the end of times, what forms of free speech should be protected and what forms of free speech should be punished.

TallAnon · Answer

That's like saying "I can press buttons all I want, right? Here, I push this one and that one, that's legal. Now if I push the one that launches a nuke, all of a sudden it's a crime? I just pushed a button!"

kyleelyn199723 · Answer

Hate speech is illegal if it puts someone in harms way, even suicide. hate speech is legal if it doesn’t affect people in a sense of harm to a being. I think hate speech is morally wrong

BillyBalls · Answer

What exactly is "hate speech"? It seems leftists clam any speech they disagree with is "hate speech"!!! Hate speech is free speech. Speech that offends or hurts your feelings is free speech.

ManHater · Answer

Well look here woman. Who is the one who does not agree with your points and considers it hate speech? Its speech that these democrats and progressive fruit cakes that don't like.

jasco · Answer

Do you think anyone would care if it were illegal? Who would deem such words illegal and how would they do it? Would they do it base off their own point of view or what? Why should someone have that much power to begin with and what would be the difference between that and what dictators do when someone speaks out against them?

MJtheCoach · Answer

Move to Canada if you want bunch of men with all the guns and military to control your speech. And see how you’d like living there.

Hate speech is basically the gov hating on you thinking freely.
It also creates fake people.
It also stop Patriotisms!!

Loveydove · Answer

Hate speech is free speech it should not be tolerated though and is far too often. Racial slurs and violent speech is a crime where I live. I don’t know if people report it often.

Agape93 · Answer

Chose A. Free speech isn't limited to nice things. It's inclusive of everything.

WhiteSteve · Answer

I kinda liked this cartoon…

JanJan38 · Answer

A, if you choose to limit speech of any kind you give up your voice.

PositiveNote · Answer

I really, really HATE those who exclaim hateful things.  Wait... did that just make me a "hater!"?

BuffHeracross · Answer

The question of whether hate speech should be legal is a question of whether allowing hate speech makes a country better.

There is currently no consensus on what "better" actually means so really the question is meaningless.

zagor · Answer

The trouble is some people define hate speech pretty loosely. It wouldn't seem that speaking against illegal immigration is hate speech, but yet there are those who would classify it that way. Generally it is legally protected in the US unless you are calling for actual violence against an individual or group. But that doesn't mean you won't lose your job or be flamed on social media for it.

Roxxy99 · Answer

Hate speech shouldn’t be banned, the first amendment gives wide latitude, but it could potentially be crime if it involves a threat of violence.

AmandaYVR · Answer

I don't believe in 'free speech' when people want it to be completely unimpeded. Hate is hate. Fuck that.  I chose B.

Razor8 · Answer

•Who decides what is hate speech? I have no idea how to define it.  •I believe you should be allowed to voice your views and opinions as long as you don't directly threaten a person or group.

exitseven · Answer

Who decides what is hate speech? Liberals I guess, because they want to outlaw the slogan "Let's Go Brandon".

DaveToo · Answer

Hate speech has been defined by the Supreme Court as any verbiage that instigates physical harm to another person or group of persons. It is illegal when defined this way.

Bhhahuanajhaunanaba · Answer

“Hate speech” is a loaded term to imply something someone has said is unacceptable. It’s often high jacked by easily offended people, who have failed in public discourse

anylolone · Answer

Wait a moment, I'm gonna ask the venezuelan homeless guy what's the consequence of hate speech laws...

He said the consequence is genocide of protesting civilians, well, after he asked for a cig and change.

Zafrica · Answer

Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence. You're free to say what you want but don't be surprised when there are consequences you don't like.

LaikaFreefall · Answer

Free speech to a point. I dont think people should be allowed to call for violence.

cookiecrusher · Answer

Yes, even hate speech is free speech. All oppinions should be heard, similar to this app, before banishing them to the depths of hell 😗

sawno · Answer

Free speech is allowing those you disagree with to speak. Hate speech is misused to silence political dissidents, jokes and unlucky teen girls who quote rap lyrics.

Jamie05rhs · Answer

Insults should be legal. Threatening words should not.

noohair · Answer

The issue to me is who decides what speech is free?

OutofBinary · Answer

I think hate speech should be legal under freedom of speech, but illegal under public indecency, public spaces should not be violated by discrimination, eespecially for tve sake of the victims and the children.

PuNishant · Answer

Every country has sedition law. There is nothing absolute in any democracy.

Yyyyu · Answer

Yes it should be. I mean you are allowed to call someone ugly short dumb or useless anyway so why not other things if you are not harming them?

Is hate speech free speech? Should hate speech be illegal?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Is hate speech free speech? Should hate speech be illegal?

Most Helpful Opinions

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.