ipl-logo

Hateful Speech

715 Words3 Pages

The first amendment in the bill of rights was integrated into the constitution as a fundamental principle, founding a citizen's right for protection against a government's power. Since the ratification of the constitution, lose interpretations have been taken for court cases that remain outside of the constitutions specified writen powers, allowing for a decision to be made on these concepts. The basis of these interpretations come from the ideology that the constitution is a living document that must change in order to adapt into the modern perspective of society. As a ramification, loose interpretation are now being prompted when addressing the first article of the constitution. These controversial outlooks placed upon the first amendment …show more content…

Hateful speech has adapted and modified it own version of ‘peaceful protest’ , maintaining the fundamental prospect of freedom, while crudely striping away peacefull and replacing it with hate: ‘hateful protest’. These ideologies of justice prompt violent outstrikes from religious and anti-religious groups that seek to protect their own personal agendas against each …show more content…

Words, especially hateful words are all powerful, they will cause aggressive reactions if they are used with a negative intent. The current system of decision making on hateful speech allows any individual to assert their prejudice and hate against any type of religion, gender, ethnicity, etc. goes against the constitution of the United States. By allowing such leaway of criminal actions, this acts as a catalytic inhibitor towards the variety of religious or any type of group. Implying that hateful speech that discriminates against a specific group will not be properly criminalized. A stricter enforcement of the first amendment will uphold and expand the protection over a citizen's right, but instead push for a greater equality in the United States. Dishing out proper punishment against a felon, providing proper protection for these groups, will all equilibrate into a proper definition of the First Article of the

Show More
Related

  • Hazlewood V. Kuhlmeier Case Study

    323 Words  | 2 Pages

    The constitution including its amendments is considered the “supreme law of the land”. The constitution has been enhanced by being steadily challenged to further interpret the meaning. These test come through many different legal cases that are brought to the Supreme Court; for example. The first amendment states “Congress shall make no law…prohibiting…or abridging the freedom of speech…” Though there are restrictions on a person’s first amendment rights, in the Hazlewood v. Kuhlmeier case this amendment was challenge when students of the school newspaper believed their rights were taken away by the principal because two pages of articles were deleted from the paper.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Us Constitution

    2340 Words  | 10 Pages

    A concerning number of citizens of the United States today consider the United States Constitution to be a relic. A memorial to aspirational thought we are to remember with fondness and adapt to our own changing societal needs. This is an unfortunate frame of mind, for this document was not merely a pleasant thought in the minds of U.S. Founders, but a brilliantly conceived legal document at significant personal cost to the men and women who developed it. It is a document that has the ability to withstand the test of time. The principles of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness were not something one would likely find as the foundation of any political doctrine until the United States Constitution was conceived in response to the lack

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Interpreting Of The Constitution

    903 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Constitution is an essential document to not only the American judiciary system, but to American society as well. Though the document’s intended purpose is to protect the people, it has caused much controversy among them. The controversy arises in the argument of how the people should be interpreting the text of the Constitution. Originalists argue the text is meant to be interpreted in the literal sense, instrumentalists oppose this view arguing that the text of the Constitution is meant to be interpreted in relevance to today (adapted to modern times). This argument is discussed by Lawrence B. Solum in parts one and two of, “The Supreme Court in Bondage: Constitutional Stare Decisis, Legal Formalism, and the Future of Unenumerated Rights”.

    Read More

  • Sorry College Kids There's No Such Thing As Hate Speech Analysis

    294 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the article “Sorry, College Kids, There’s No Such Thing As Hate Speech” by The Federalist. The author John Daniel Davidson believes there is so no such thing as hate speech unless it is a crime. I agree with the author, you can say what you want unless it causes a riot or a crime is committed. [1]The case, which involved a white teenager burning a cross made from taped-together broken chair legs in the front yard of a black family that lived across the street, went to the U.S. Supreme Court. In this case I believe if no one was hurt and there wasn’t any damage to the property the white teenager shouldn’t be convicted.

    Read More

  • The Bell Curve Charles Murray Analysis

    841 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Hard Spoken Reality At Middlebury College, hundreds protested the speaker Charles Murray because of what they believe to be his racist views on economics. In Murray’s book The Bell Curve, he asserts that the difference in economic standing between races is caused by a difference in intellect and that one race is intellectually inferior to the other. One would expect this blatant racism to cause a backlash and protests, however, over 20 years after the book was written in 1994, there are still rampant protests of Charles Murray; protests which have only intensified in the past year due to the election of Donald J Trump. At Claremont McKenna College, students protested Heather Mac Donald, a strong advocate of a more aggressive stance on crime, including police tactics that opponents say crack down too harshly on black men and perpetuate a war on the police.

    Read More

  • Hate Crime Legislation

    111 Words  | 1 Pages

    Conversely, under hate crime legislation it is clear to see that the prosecution of hate crimes further divides society by reinforcing the marginalisation of minority groups. Advocates with ideologies akin to this state that all violent crimes are the result of the offender’s absolute contempt for the victim of the hate crime. In such cases like this, all crimes are hate crimes and if no alternate rationale for prosecuting some people more harshly than others for the same crime based on who the victim is, a situation arises where different offenders charged with the same offence are treated unequally under the law which inadvertently creates discrimination, prejudices and unfairness in society.

    Read More

  • Hate Speech Should Be Protected Under The First Amendment

    1245 Words  | 5 Pages

    Berlatsky pronounces how if certain groups who practice hate speech such as Nazis, those who hold extreme racist or authoritarian views, are silenced, other groups will be silenced as well. Therefore, he concludes how, “You need to protect people who hate marginalized people, or marginalized people will be targeted next” (Berlatsky par. 2). In the article, the author includes a quote by John Moore on how how society should not defend Nazis “and other purveyors of hate speech, [instead] a more balanced approach is needed” (Berlatsky par. 1). Therefore, the author also agrees with pro-ban hate speech supporters on how defending Nazis does not strengthen the system of free

    Read More

  • Hate Speech College Campuses

    1116 Words  | 5 Pages

    Lawrence III I believes that face-to-face confrontation should be counted as fighting words. (Timmons “Disputed Moral Issues”, pages 174-177). He describes that hate speech shouldn’t be considered under the first amendment because the person committing this act is not verbally speaking aloud to invite a discussion or rational argument but to instead “injure the victim”(Timmons “Disputed Moral Issues”, page 175). I believe in the idea of what Lawrence is conveying because when I take a utilitarian approach and try to weigh the benefits for human society I realize that fighting and violence don't amount to much forward progress and advancement. The fact being that no hate speech ever has amounted to any good in history.

    Read More

  • Essay On First Amendment

    473 Words  | 2 Pages

    This can hurt and impact many in the future, “Sticks and stones may break our bones, but words will break our hearts.” (Fulgrum) The first amendment allows this. On the other hand, this amendment should stay the same. It should stay the same because the government shouldn’t be allowed to control what people say.

    Read More

  • What Is The Importance Of The First Amendment

    676 Words  | 3 Pages

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” These words are the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Indicate some important thoughts about the meaning of liberty. Isadore Starr, a leader in the fields of law-related and citizen education, described the important of the First Amendment: “Remove the First Amendment from the United Sates Constitution and you strike out the very means of testing the other rights and of protesting abuses of government.” (Isidore Starr, 1978)

    Read More

  • First Amendment Bill Of Rights

    155 Words  | 1 Pages

    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.

    Read More

  • Charles Lawrence Racist Speech Summary

    770 Words  | 4 Pages

    Charles Lawrence in his racist speech tries to convince that racist speech needs to be regulated. He argues that hate speech is intolerable in the United States because it represents discrimination which Everyone defines hate speech differently. I define hate speech as anything that incites aggression regarding one person or a group of people. Now a day’s people uses free speech as a defense for saying anything but discriminating someone is not free speech.

    Read More

  • Should Hate Speech Be Prevented

    279 Words  | 2 Pages

    Should hate speech be prevented? Hate can provoke violent incidents which are capable of having a stronger impact on victims than ordinary crimes. For example, they send a message to communities that these communities should be denied the right to be part of society. Since hate speech may promote hate crimes, the two concepts are interlinked. Responses to hate crime would call for changes in legislation and training in the criminal justice system aimed at improving responses to hate crimes; such as, investigation, prosecution, and prevention of hate crimes.

    Read More

  • Robin Lakoff Hate Speech Analysis

    151 Words  | 1 Pages

    Hate speech destroys the First Amendment because it doesn't allow a person to express their free speech. According to Lakoff, people who don’t experience hate speech, don't think

    Read More

  • Free Speech Persuasive Speech

    746 Words  | 3 Pages

    Words have power and not to just inspire, but to harm, separate, intimidate, and in some cases kill. Although the freedom to say what we wish is a right that every American is given, which speech should be protected and which should not? The line between offensive and harmful language is a very thin one with no real definable border. It is impossible to avoid offending everyone now and days, but attempting to harm another with words to deliberately cause emotional or psychological damage should be unacceptable. Charles Lawrence, Derek Bok, and Gwen Wilde all had interesting perspectives on the first amendment and what controversial ways it is used.

    Read More

More about Hateful Speech

Open Document