In 1977, the American National Socialist (The American Nazi Party) wanted to march on Skokie, IL because it had a large Jewish population and 1 of 6 Jewish citizens survived the german death camps.
The ACLU, a very liberal group, fought and secured the right of the socialist to march on this town, defending their actions as defending freedom for speech we hate.
Clearly there can be no greater example of hate speech by any group.
Why should their be limits on the freedom to speak? Hurting someone's feelings cannot be a crime. How would anyone even be able to define what criminal "Hate Speech" even is?
Isn't the notion of "Hate Speech" just an absurd idea?
2007-06-21 07:59:35 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
Except for "feelings" words cannot cause harm to another person.
Causing harm to someone is called 'Assult' and that is a crime.
It's sad to see how many people actualy believe rights should be limited by the gvmt.
2007-06-21 08:35:06 · update #1
regularguynlr - I sympathize for you, I can't think of one reason gvmt regulates marriage. However gvmt does treat people differently. People who earn more pay higher taxes, we don't pay equal taxes for example,
We both can get married, we both have the same restrictions as well. So it can be said that we are equal.
2007-06-21 09:06:50 · update #2
It's shocking that some people believe that freedom should be limited or regulated because of the "human" element.
Because we are human is the reason why our rights and freedoms should be unlimited.
Imagine if someday a different majority got into power and decided that the gay rights movement needed to be regulated or limited.
No, this should never happen. Ideas ebb and tide by the power of their own strength. There should be no interference by government.
2007-06-21 08:28:19 · answer #1 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree with you that the goverment should not try to contain speechs. That freedom of speech is very important, but you are wrong if you do not recognize the gvmt does limit a person's rights. Take for instance that as a gay person I can not get married or adopt children in my state. But yet I pay taxes just like everyone else including to educate others kids. Now tell me whats absurd.
2007-06-21 08:49:40 · answer #2 · answered by regularguynlr 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
the subject with censoring something is that the words are frequently very subjective. it relatively is, somebody has to make a type no count if or no longer a e book promotes racism. From there, the government can come to a type that different textile is undesirable for individuals to examine. This contraptions the government up as a "nanny" state, and condescendingly controls human beings with the aid of what it helps and disallows. the essential concept of freedom of speech is that a individual could be allowed to chat or write in spite of they desire, and credit the electorate with being smart sufficient to make their own judgements. Censorship contraptions up an elite classification of individuals who come to a type what's suitable for each and each of something of the peons. This, of course, is precisely what means hungry governments desire, and that they attempt to slip it with the aid of on the standard public with the aid of making use of doubtless benevolent potential. Any e book must be observed as "racist". it rather is thrilling additionally which you pronounced neo-nazis and the KKK, yet did no longer point out the Black Panthers, l. a. Raza, or the different enterprise merchandising militant racism. In different words, you look to experience racism basically applies to white supremist companies, yet to no longer others. it relatively is a fact of existence interior the U. S. already under so-observed as "hate crime" law. Any crime committed with the aid of a directly white individual on anybody of a diverse race is a hate crime, yet against the regulation committed against a directly white individual with the aid of somebody of a diverse race isn't a hate crime. subsequently, the regulation itself is racist and quite hypocritical. Hate is going the two tactics. the fast answer is that freedom is physically powerful. usa survived an prolonged time without folk telling us a thank you to think of, yet it relatively is all changing now. there'll consistently be undesirable human beings interior the international. you won't be able to legislate them away.
2016-10-02 21:45:29 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hate speech is not an absurd idea
i personally think that people should not use their freedoms to abuse other people and to abuse the freedoms of other people.
in other words, you should have the freedom to do anything except harm or OPPRESS someone or their freedoms
2007-06-21 08:21:55 · answer #4 · answered by God ◊ Machine 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
This is not a public park or walkway...this is a privately owned website who's administrators set a TERMS OF SERVICE agreement that ALL users of this site MUST agree to and adhere to, to maintain usage of this product.
2007-06-21 08:04:15 · answer #5 · answered by DEATH 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Hate speech is one of the diagnostic symptoms of mental illness.
2007-06-21 08:09:00 · answer #6 · answered by Gaymes Last Orchestra 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
lol All freedom is limited because of the human factor.
Peace
2007-06-21 08:05:57 · answer #7 · answered by Threshin 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋