The Instigator
Holdthepickle
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Iacov
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Freedom of Speech Does Not Give the Right to be hateful towards others

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/19/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 404 times Debate No: 95506
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

Holdthepickle

Pro

After reading a debate that you had about political correctness, I saw you said Freedom of Speech protects us, allowing us to say hateful/rude statements to one another. I am here to claim that the first amendment does in fact NOT allow us to say hateful/rude things to one another
Iacov

Con

Thank you for making this debate seeing as the other one you are referring to, my opponent has not posted his last 2 arguments. I accept the challenge and eagerly await your opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1
Holdthepickle

Pro

In recent months this topic in the media has blown up do to, mainly, Donald Trump and his many "hateful" statements. Now in your opinion, you believe that the First Amendment allows people to use Freedom of Speech to spew hateful or rude statements to one another. The First Amendment, pertaining to freedom of speech, states "Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech". This meaning the government cannot sensor what we say ALTHOUGH, we as American citizens are not protected by the Constitution to use "Hate Speech".
Hate Speech being "speech that offends, threatens, or insults groups, based on race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, disability, or other traits." (Dictionary.com) This speech is not and SHOULD NOT be allowed. These are covered up by "Political Correctness" giving people respect and not offending someone. While some people say "political correctness is ruining this society", is it really? It, in method, stops the use of hate speech which is not protected in the Constitution and is basically illegal.
In conclusion to the opening arguments, the use of hateful/rude comments are not protected by the first amendment in the United States Constitution. I look forward to hearing your response and will respond to it in a quick and timely matter. Good luck and again I look forward to your response.
Iacov

Con

You say that any speech that either offends,threatens, or insults a group of people is considered hate speech and should not be permitted.
Insult / Offend: although people of course don't like being offended or insulted there should never be a law to censor any form of speech regardless of how offensive it may be, if people's feelings are hurt so be it their feelings are not protected by the constitution.
Threat: threatening speech is legally defined to only be a threat if the user has both the capacity and intent. For example if I simply said "I'm going to kick you in the face!" it is not a threat but if I say it while staying above you with my leg raised it is legally a threat.
The fact of the matter is as the sjw culture begins to spread it is only the speech that begins to offended people and makes people feel uncomfortable that is being dubbed "hate speech" and is being relentlessly attack on social media and college campuses across the country. It is because of this outrage culture that I encourage people to be as outrageous as possible.
Debate Round No. 2
Holdthepickle

Pro

Arguing on if an insult could be a tough thing to do. Alas, insulting someone could be considered defamation of character. An example would be if one student is in class and in front of the entire class loudly proclaims "You smell like s#!t". This would be a great example of what hate speech is, in fact, this could also be categorized as slander and this could ruin the students' reputation which this type of speech is not protected in the constitution.
Next you claimed what legally defines a threat BUT, you stated the definition of a generalized crime. The term threat covers a large group of things including harassment which puts saying "I'm going to kick you in the face!" illegal. It isn't a felony but it is still a crime.
Although this is not a strong argument to end on, this does in fact disprove both of those statements previously made by yourself.
Iacov

Con

Regarding if a insult is defamation:
A defamatory statement is a false statement of fact that exposes a person to hatred, ridicule, or contempt, causes him to be shunned, or injures him in his business or trade. Statements that are merely offensive are not defamatory (e.g., a statement that Bill smells badly would not be sufficient (and would likely be an opinion anyway). Courts generally examine the full context of a statement's publication when making this determination. Defamation is not a crime, but it is a "tort" (a civil wrong, rather than a criminal wrong). A person who has been defamed can sue the person who did the defaming. Thusly defamation is not illegal.
Regarding a threat:
The civil harassment laws say "harassment" is: Unlawful violence, like assault or battery or stalking, OR. A credible threat of violence, AND. The violence or threats seriously scare, annoy, or harass someone and there is no valid reason for it.
Now I agree that someone saying the will kick you in the face may "scar, annoy or harass" you it does not mean the threat is "credible" unless the person has once again both the intent and capacity to do so.
In closing:
All forms of speech are protected by the constitution regardless of how offensive it may be unless that speech creates a clear and present danger to anyone or group of people.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by dsjpk5 5 months ago
dsjpk5
Why didn't Con ask Pro to show us a single law outlawing "hate speech"??? No such law exists in the US. it would have been an easy win for Con, but now.....
Posted by psif 5 months ago
psif
Freedom of Speech Does Not Give the Right to be hateful towards others.

Agreed. Depending on context. For example, "Do people have the right to be hateful toward rapists?"

It could (possibly) go further and be stated that "No person has the right to be hateful/harmful."
However, this becomes more arbitrary for subjects such as Euthanasia. It's really a matter of compassion. A person with Muscular Dystrophy and in pain should not be forced to live against their own will if they choose not to.
Posted by Iacov 5 months ago
Iacov
Insult: verb: speak to or treat with disrespect or scornful abuse.
Ex. "You smell like ****"
Posted by Holdthepickle 5 months ago
Holdthepickle
Iacov, before we start the last round, could you please give me an example of an "insult" so I can verify that we are on the same page?
Posted by Iacov 5 months ago
Iacov
This right here is exactly what I mean.
Posted by Debateallday212 5 months ago
Debateallday212
The only speech not protected by the first amendment the following:
Fighting Words - Speech that is used to inflame another and that will likely incite physical retaliation, also language that is meant to incite the masses toward lawless action is not protected. This can include speech that is intended to incite violence or to encourage the audience to commit illegal acts. A good example of this is if some yelled "Burn it all down, Burn this mother f*cker down!".
Obscenity - Most forms of obscenity are protected by the First Amendment. However, there is a high threshold that must be met in order for obscenity not to be protected, which includes showing that the language appeals to the prurient interest in sex, that it depicts something that is considered patently offensive based on contemporary community standards and that it lacks serious literary, scientific or artistic value.
Crimes Involving Speech - The First Amendment also does not provide protection for forms of speech that are used to commit a crime, such as perjury, extortion or harassment.
Threats - Speech is not usually protected when it constitutes a threat toward another that places the target of such speech of bodily harm or death. There are certain exceptions, such as when a reasonable person would understand the language not to be a credible threat. Additionally, threats of mere social ostracism or boycotts are protected by the constitution.
Child Pornography
Libel and Slander
Violation of Copyright Rules
Conduct Regulations
Commercial Speech
The constitution gives every American the right to speak with hate so long as it doesn't infringe upon other's liberties. I, as well as every other American, can say things like Mexicans are lazy, Blacks are violent idiots, and Whites are just plain sh*tty... I am expressing ideas that might be unpopular and for the most part untrue, but your sensitivities are not my concern. By trying to suppress my thoughts and ideas you are infringing on my libe
No votes have been placed for this debate.