Free speech and Hate Speech.
In present days it is justly common to find when something troublesome happens and people protest or complain about it, the question comes up of "what about free speech." Freedom of speech is like a slang that people find themselves fiercely holding onto whenever they get called out about something. Freedom of speech is a phrase used to characterize the actuality of individuals in most countries having the freedom to say whatever they want. However, most times, free speech can move into a dangerous zone of hate speech. In Canada, section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects "freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication". As defined above, Free speech is when an individual can say whatever they want. Hate speech is when individuals can say things that are overly offensive or harmful, essentially to a particular group of people, e.g. racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. Most people would debate that since there is such a thing as freedom of speech, people should be allowed to listen to people who say harmful things, and different opinions and worldviews should be considered, if not then society would not progress anywhere. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Free speech performs in two ways. The first is, if free speech happens to become hate speech, then others have the right to use their own right to free speech to accuse and criticize. Every day people
Hate speech is defined as: speech that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, color, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. While the United States has the bill of rights and the freedom of expression/speech some states do have speech provisions such as California. There are laws that label speech as ‘limited classes’ which could cause one to be sued in a court of law and that would include: lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous and the insulting or “fighting” words – those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. All other speech is protected under your first amendment rights. Refer to a legal expert when in
In my interpretation of the First Amendment, the rights of the people to freely express their opinions, even if unpopular, is clearly protected. Specifically, hate speech is not clearly defined and may differ between people. Individuals and groups can disagree on if specific issues may be considered hateful. Advocates of, what some may consider as hate speech, will likely disagree that their opinions on an issue would be considered hate speech. Protecting all speech, including hate speech, should only imply that the government is following the first amendment to not interfere or be prejudice against anyone expressing their opinions if done so with regard to other laws.
The United States didn’t invent freedom. The Greeks and Romans had their democratic principles and the British had their Magna Carta before we were a nation. We are not even considered the “most free” nation in the world. In fact, we were ranked 20th in the world earlier this year by the Cato Institute in the “human freedom index.”
Tierney Baumann Mr. Barnes Period 1 4/17/23 The First Amendment Hate speech has increased by 11.6% in the last 5 years. The first amendment allows hate speech. The first amendment is unfair, unjust and needs to change. The first amendment allows hate speech.
The First Amendment of the United States Constitution protects the right of “freedom of speech” Bill of Rights, n.d., p. 1). It was designed to guarantee a free exchange of ideas, even if the ideas are unpopular. One of the most controversial free speech issues involves hate speech. Hate speech is a public expression of discrimination against a vulnerable group, based on “race, ethnicity, religion,” and sexual orientation (Karman, 2016, p. 3940). Under the First Amendment there is no exception to hate speech; although, hateful ideas are protected just as other ideas.
Hate Crime is a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity.” If an African American commits the same crime as an Caucasian it is more likely for the black person to be charged and arrested due to the racial issues we have today. There are many pros and cons towards the issue of racial crime, but hate crime is still a very difficult issue for our country to overcome. In order to overcome the issue of hate crime it would require changing legislation, public and police attitudes.
There are currently no constitutional limits on hate speech, even though many community areas such as college campuses have passed restrictions. Any law that restricts hate speech is actually unconstitutional as of right now, and to move forward with an agenda that would restrict speech in this way on a federal level is simply not supported by the Constitution. Attempting to pass a law that defines hateful speech and outlaws it would be a violation of the first amendment, as it would be very difficult to do so in a way that does not infringe on other liberties granted under the first amendment. Many of those who support hate speech as a first amendment right argue that hateful words do not incite violence unless that violence already existed, and would have happened with or without encouragement. This is a nice thought, and in a perfect world it would even be true, however, this notion is not supported by the massive amount of evidence showing violent acts encouraged by hateful speech.
Many people believe that the First Amendment gives the people right to say whatever they want but it’s not true. There is no hate speech exception to First Amendment. There are some kind of words which are not protected especially the fighting or insulting words or speech in which a person threatens to commit a crime that would result in death, serious injury, or damage is not protected by the First Amendment, instead First Amendment gives the right to fight against injustice, inequality and unfairness. For example Black Lives Matter movement, this movement has every right to express their feelings. The ways they are protesting are protected under the First Amendment.
America is pushing the constitution by trying to stop the freedom of speech, by the state governments and the capital. The first amendment (Freedom of speech) says “Freedom of speech is the concept of the inherent human right to voice one's opinion publicly without fear of censorship or punishment.” They are trying to stop us from saying what we want by shutting us up when the police come, we have the right to say what we want to, the police can’t stop it. They don’t want us to say what we want to because they think it will be hurtful to the government, like saying against a law they put out, or protesting to something they do. They are canceling out what we are trying to tell them.
Although hate speech is bigoted, hate-mongering, and can potentially lead to hate crimes, it should still be considered free speech. If citizens of the United States are not allowed to be verbal about their beliefs, whether or not they are offensive and hateful, then there is no use in allowing free speech. Placing limitations on free speech contradicts the First Amendment, therefore making it inaccurate and useless.
Free speech and hate speech can be classified as different topics and when arguing for one, we can also criticize the other. Free expression and free speech on campuses are crucial for sparking important conversations about equality and social justice, and the suspension of free speech and expression may have dire consequences on college campuses. First, freedom of expression allows students to show their own political, social, and cultural views, while also allowing students with common beliefs to align. Free speech and the call for free speech allows those who have been historically systematically oppressed to use their voice.
The way someone feels is imitated by what we face in everyday life. I do agree that everyone should have freedom of speech, but it should be redirected by not hurting others view in how they interrupt it. It should be approached with a tasteful opinion. We may think that something that we say is not
In the recent news, everyone’s heard of the rise in hate crime. Most hate crime is “motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence,” (Dictionary.com). Hate crimes have spanned across the country and impact thousands of lives each year. The FBI started investigating hate crimes at the turn of the 20th century. The FBI define hate crime as, “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity,” (FBI).
We can’t misuse the freedom of speech, saying words that can cause serious harm (bullying). This form of speech will cause depression, suicide, and stunted social development. When freedom of speech hurts others, then it is not just an opinion anymore; it is a form of hate
I am undecided for Freedom of Speech. There are plenty of good and bad qualities, and as much as there are pros there are also an equal amount of cons to freedom of speech. According to the first amendment, we the people have the freedom of speech which allows us the right to speak freely without censorship. Freedom of speech is not absolute in any country and the right is commonly subject to limitations, such as on “hate speech”. There are many pros and cons to freedom of speech, which is why I am only discussing three pros and cons, that I find that argues the opposite side, to the point it made me undecided on free speech.