General Discussion

sarisataka

(22,695 posts)

5. Exactly why

Reply to David__77 (Reply #1)

Sat Aug 12, 2017, 11:47 AM

Aug 2017

it is protected, along with the right to peaceably assemble

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Should hate speech be protected under first ammendment?? [View all] Le Gaucher Aug 2017 OP

What is hate speech? David__77 Aug 2017 #1

Exactly why sarisataka Aug 2017 #5

Speech that I disagree with. Dr. Strange Aug 2017 #13

It is whatever those in power say it is. NutmegYankee Aug 2017 #22

Hate speech is protected by the 1st Amendment snowybirdie Aug 2017 #2

Well said. I will also say that using the power of HeartachesNhangovers Aug 2017 #8

Of course it should Pale Blue Dot Aug 2017 #3

I think that traitor rag needs to banned like the nazi flag is in Germany nt maryellen99 Aug 2017 #4

The problem always arises as to who gets to define "hate speech". justhanginon Aug 2017 #6

The First Amendment protects all speech that isn't defamatory, The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2017 #7

Porn/"obscenity" should be protected too, but it isnt. nm mr_liberal Aug 2017 #17

Pornography is, too. Hello, Hustler? WinkyDink Aug 2017 #33

"obscenity" isn't protected, but despite the efforts of Andrea Dworkin and Ed Meese Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #40

De facto. WinkyDink Aug 2017 #54

Its really not. You should read what the supreme court has mr_liberal Aug 2017 #49

And you should read the follow-up to Miller: WinkyDink Aug 2017 #53

SCOTUS Precedent. That's gotta be even more distressing to the anti-masturbation league. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #59

The fact that they can't get a conviction also proves that it's not "obscenity". Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #55

I agree. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #43

There is lots of speech besides defamatory, pornographic or incites violence that is not protected grantcart Aug 2017 #18

You *can* yell fire in a theatre, if there really is a fire. The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2017 #19

Are you really so obtuse as to think I was referrring to yelling fire in a theatre where no fire grantcart Aug 2017 #21

It's not very nice to accuse somebody of being obtuse. The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2017 #24

You have difficulty with language grantcart Aug 2017 #28

Atlantic: It's Time to Stop Using the 'Fire in a Crowded Theater' Quote Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #38

You can't be arrested for yelling "Bingo!" GET REAL. The 1st Amendment protects citizens from govt WinkyDink Aug 2017 #37

Who gets to define what falls under hate speech? ProgressiveValue Aug 2017 #9

Me. I'm going to start with everyone who ever said "The Grateful Dead Sucks" Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #47

Yes DashOneBravo Aug 2017 #10

IF its used to deliberately incite a riot then i say no samnsara Aug 2017 #11

That's already the law. Speech that directly incites violence isn't protected. The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2017 #12

Unfortunately, some people seem to think "anything that might make someone mad" is "incitement" Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #36

I don't want judges determining that. David__77 Aug 2017 #14

Slippery Slope peggysue2 Aug 2017 #15

"Nice" speech doesn't need protection cyclonefence Aug 2017 #16

It's a fine line most judges and even the ACLU are reluctant to cross DFW Aug 2017 #20

Yes it should. Agschmid Aug 2017 #23

This message was self-deleted by its author smirkymonkey Aug 2017 #25

Yes unless it breaks another law. aikoaiko Aug 2017 #26

Yes, sunlight is the best disinfectant DeminPennswoods Aug 2017 #27

Yes it should lunatica Aug 2017 #29

Then you should move somewhere else's. Codeine Aug 2017 #30

Who gets to decide what hate speech is? NT Adrahil Aug 2017 #31

N.T.S. AGAIN. STUDY THE GODDAMN U.S. CONSTITUTION. WinkyDink Aug 2017 #32

It's not "should" it be protected. It is. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #34

Yes, all those Liberal Democrat employers**. Perhaps DU ought think about what might be "offensive" WinkyDink Aug 2017 #39

People say stupid and offensive shit on the internet, it can affect their employment/job prospects Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #42

I'm just sayin' that some employers might not take too kindly to DU POSTS. Be careful what you wish WinkyDink Aug 2017 #46

Well, anyone who knows me knows where I stand on things, so personally, whatever. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #50

Not referring to you personally. WinkyDink Aug 2017 #56

The Alt Right would use it on us. DemocratSinceBirth Aug 2017 #35

Exactly. We have a president who is attacking the free press and our democratic institutions. Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #44

Hit and run. WinkyDink Aug 2017 #41

Hate Speech that invites violence is not protected ismnotwasm Aug 2017 #45

However, when was the last time there was an actual succesful prosecution for "incitement"? Warren DeMontague Aug 2017 #51

"Incites" is the verb. WinkyDink Aug 2017 #57

Answer--YES! brooklynite Aug 2017 #48

The law makes no distinction. Keefer Aug 2017 #52

People who raise this query often imagine that the Arbiters of Legal Speech will be of a mind like WinkyDink Aug 2017 #58

Yes, also protected are efforts to reveal the identities geek tragedy Aug 2017 #60

Please read the 1st amendment GulfCoast66 Aug 2017 #61