2007-03-11 10:44:05 · 13 answers · asked by anne s 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
im supposed to be against this for a debate
2007-03-11 10:50:45 · update #1
i need to be against this for a debate..like they shouldn't be able to. So any Info that helps would be much appreciated
2007-03-11 10:51:27 · update #2
No, they should not. That's one of the biggest problems in the U.S. I personally feel that if you are in the U.S., you HAVE TO ACCEPT EVERYONE ELSE. Otherwise, GO BACK WERE YOUR RACE IS FROM.
It's especially bad to see white groups rallying to hate others, since, they're supposedly so freakin right. If you look at it they're the only ones that do that.
What we need is more non-white groups to start doing it in retaliation against the whites. But, I bet they would immediately attack that. Then, it wouldn't be permitted.
DESTROY THE RACIST WHITES, which is all of them. They're racist and ruin everything. They slaughtered the Indians, are the cause of every war, and rob everyone.
2007-03-11 11:00:03 · answer #1 · answered by kasar777 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely. Their speech is either detested by the audience, in which case they win nothing by being public other than the disgust of the rest of society, or they are correct, and are able to convince a majority that they are right, and are then able to change laws.
You see, this is what a democracy is about. We don't evolve our society unless opinions we disagree with can be heard; this is why freedom of speech is so important.
It's very easy to defend speech we all agree on; it takes a brave and well-educated populace to accept the need for speech they dislike, and to be able to argue cogently against their views.
Banning hate speech simply drives it underground, where it festers undisturbed by controversy, contradition, or any real discussion.
2007-03-11 17:56:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is a good question Anne, but as with most questions regarding Social Government, it cannot be answered without asking several other very important questions first.
(1) What is the definition of a hate group ? Is it those who espouse violence towards groups or individuals they disagree with ? Is it a group who's agenda is that of oppression or marginalization ?
and more importantly - once we have decided what the criteria for " being a hate group " is -
(2) Who or what body actually decides what groups are hate groups ?
Answering the above questions is in fact much more difficult than answering your question.
2007-03-11 18:14:19 · answer #3 · answered by Rod M 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I see why there has to be an open forum to exercises freedom of speech.., HOWEVER.., they key here is the word "freedom".
If ANY group threatens that freedom by preaching that a particular race or any human being needs to be killed, tortured and or beaten (depriving those people of the freedom of life and right to health) THEN those hate groups must be stopped cold.
When we allow hate groups to start indoctrinating others to harm another individual because of skin color, religious beliefs or whatever - then it has exceeded the rights to freedom of expression. We cant let one group trample on the greatest right of all - the right to "LIFE", liberty and Justice.
2007-03-11 18:03:51 · answer #4 · answered by Victor ious 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In the US, absolutely.
Free speech only works in situations where everyone is free to speak, whether we agree with their viewpoint or not. Once we start silencing groups just because we (or any majority) don't like what they are saying, we've lost.
Once we decide to silence people we disagree with, just because we are in the majority, we've abandoned the concept of freedom and betrayed the core values this country was founded upon.
That's what people don't seem to get about the ACLU. They defend everyone's right to free speech -- not because they agree with the speech, but because if we don't then nobody is free to speak except whoever the majority allows. And that's not freedom, that's tyranny.
If you truly believe in the land of the free, then you'll defend the rights of everyone to be free to express their opinion, whether you agree with their opinion or not.
2007-03-11 17:53:12 · answer #5 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sure, why not? They're free to do what they will. Just as people of a particulare religion are free to come to your front door and impose their religion upon you with their pamphlets and such.
2007-03-11 17:49:43 · answer #6 · answered by T Time 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No they shouldn't be able to. But its called freedom of speech. If somebody acts on one of these hate crimes only then it will be illegal.
Hate groups blow. Why do people have to hate?
2007-03-11 17:47:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
People should have the freedom to do whatever they want as long as they're not breaking the law.
2007-03-11 17:47:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you are referring to the US...Yes, It's called freedom of speech.
2007-03-11 17:51:12 · answer #9 · answered by baalberith11704 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. Hate only leads to more hate.
2007-03-11 17:48:24 · answer #10 · answered by shazamshawn 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋