Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

grantcart

(53,061 posts)
21. Are you really so obtuse as to think I was referrring to yelling fire in a theatre where no fire
Sat Aug 12, 2017, 04:32 PM
Aug 2017

existed.

Your original statement that "The First Amendment protects all speech that isn't defamatory, pornographic, or that directly incites violence" is a ridiculously narrow understanding of how rights work. There is no absolute right and no list of narrow exceptions. All rights live in a matrix of other rights. You can say "Adolph Hitler was right" in your home, in the park, or in a meeting of neo Nazis. If you stand up and say it in a Synagogue prior to a religious service you will be arrested and your speech is not protected.

And yes even if you think its funny to disrupt a bunch of old folks by yelling bingo during their game the constitution will not protect you.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/20/man-yells-bingo-austin-whaley_n_2909806.html

Recommendations

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

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
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Should hate speech be pro...»Reply #21