How far should "freedom of speech" be allowed to go?

Question

I know everyone wants to hold onto as many rights as we can, but does everyone know the KKK still has rallies? They are spreading their hateful horrible messages, not just about blacks, but jews and latinos? And the police are forced to PROTECT them! They have to make sure someone doesn't get riled up and try to HANG THEM like they do everyone else. When will hate speech, in ANY form, be considered unconstitutional?

Ok, I definitely don't want to take any freedoms away, that would definitely be a big step back! BUT if they are out there saying they want ALL jews dead, ALL latinos dead, and ALL blacks dead, isn't that a threat to those races? Isn't there a law that can hold them accountable for death threats? Especially considering that throughout our american history they have been well known for acting on their statements!

Answer 1

Let them speak. I want them out in the open where I can see what they're up to.

Editing to add - your last statement is very reactionary. They stopped acting on it 40 years ago. I don't want to drive them underground. KNOW THE ENEMY!

Answer 2

The cops protect the Klan because they are like brothers.
No government actually practices allowing free speech, I know from experience being beaten while handcuffed. For "Free" speech.

But after my little rant there, there's a really good use for free speech.

Let's say, just for instance, hypothetically... the rulers passed a Noble Law that people who were dangerously stupid had to go around with some clearly identifiable mark or uniform with their IQ prominently displayed...

That would step heavily on civil rights. There would be an outcry, and rightly so. It would be reminiscent of the Pink Triangle or the JudenStern uniforms the Nazi governments used.


But enter Freedom of Speech. in ALL its glory.
If you tell people that they can say everything that comes into their heads, yes my brothers,
and tell them that they can, o my brothers
they can tell all the world all their innermost stupid and hateful thoughts, they will go forth,
can I get an Amen!
and they will proudly wear a white uniform with a pointy hat, or a tee-shirt yeeess or a bumper sticker that tells us, in plain sight and proudly, that they are dangerously stupid.

Plus limiting one form of speech, while it might seem like a neat idea at the time, backfires every time. Where do you draw the line, set the limits, of free speech?

Because if you give a group as powerful as the government the license to set that limit, you KNOW they won't stop at just the hate speech.

There are people in this country today, like Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, who say that making anti war speeches or worse even, NOT making pro-war speeches, is treason.

and treason is a Death Penalty crime.
And they have the ear of the Emperor.

Are you willing to give that much power to freaks like that?
I sure ain't.

Answer 3

That's both the blessing and the curse of the First Amendment. As long as the people speaking make no threats against the president, any elected official, nor threaten to overthrow the government by force, it's protected speech. Trust me, I don't like the insulting things I hear Christians saying about people who disagree with their beliefs, and I would like to drop Rush Limbaugh and the rest of right-wing hate-radio hosts off the nearest tall bridge, but I would still defend their right to be stupid on the airwaves. It is a crime to commit acts of terror or vandalism against a protected group, so there's that. But words only hurt if you let them. The KKK are a bunch of evolutionary throwbacks in satin dresses and gnome hats; more than blacks, Jews, Catholics or gays, they hate themselves. If you pay attention to them, you give weight to their words. Turn and walk away.

*EDIT* We have laws protecting minorities from violent acts, as I said above. They're called "Hate Crimes," and they're federal offences. Many KKK members have been convicted of hate crimes, as have many others not affilited with the Klan. I agree, I'd like the law to shut them up, too; unfortunately, censorship is a broad brush that eventually splashes everyone.

Answer 4

You'd think that with all the hatred in the world and the ease in which the world communicates that somewhere we would want to do the right thing and work towards a better world.
But, outlawing speech ? Who becomes the Deputy Dawg and whos' standard do we go by? As much as I dread the existance of groups like KKK, Religious Extremists, etc. comprimising my rights does not justify the false sense of satisfaction you get until a right you cherish is taken away.

Answer 5

Freedom of speech should be allowed unlimited unless there are perhaps national security concerns involved. The KKK and their ignorant ilk [sadly] have a right to say what they feel. To change this behavior they need to be re-educated - what we know is what we've learned - they are racist for the same reason some people are terrorists - they REALLY BELIEVE in their cause/opinions because thats what they've been indoctrinated with - telling them to shut up won't change their minds but a better and more rational education might

Answer 6

I think hate speech is acceptable as long as they do not meant to incite violence. That is unfortunately a grey area. The problem also goes on the other end on what is a racist statement. Some political statements (immigration) and religious statements can also be construed as a hate speech as well. I am more afraid that certain people are trying to control our thoughts, by misusing laws to restrict our ability to speak. In Yahoo, policeman are trying to find reason to violate people who speak about possible police misconduct. I got really upset with the Vietnamese-American community, who harassed a communist and created a law specifically to restrict our ability to make political statement.
My main issue of restricting hate speech, is that it reduces our ability to understand racist. If we don't understand them, we have a harder time fighting them

Answer 7

The pendulum of social change swings BOTH ways.

What is popular today, may well be unacceptable to a later generation.

If you grant our government the authority to suppress someone else's opinions, then our government can also suppress YOUR expression, if it's deemed offensive, objectionable, or dangerous.

Freedom of expression is an INALIENABLE right.

Do you know the definition of "inalienable"?

Would you do away with our Constitution and our Bill of Rights?

"What goes around, comes around."

Answer 8

I am definitely anti-KKK, but you have to admit that they paved the way for Martin Luther King and many others. And the only thing I hate more than the KKK is the media. The media is killing this country.

Answer 9

I believe in freedom of speech id also rather it be in the open at least I know where such groups stand. Do I think its Right no but racism is here unfortunately so it will cross our paths.

Answer 10

i could define freedom as a state of being the place i'm able to make alternatives that are no longer motivated by skill of my passions, strategies, protection, relationships with others, worry and so on... i'm purely as unfastened as i'm able to detach from those issues. particular, I do think of freedom does exist! everyone that has been on the part of melancholy and got here returned is conscious this to be genuine because of the fact they arrive across that their soreness lies interior the attachment to regardless of is inflicting the misery. a majority of those issues are imperfect and that they are going to depart me nonetheless wanting. ……for thou hast made us for thyself and under pressure is our coronary heart till it is composed of relax in thee. ~Saint Augustine