• Yes.

    Hate speech is hate speech, no matter what. Using the title of the question, it is hate speech which should be penalized by censorship. Speech should be allowed until it becomes insulting to groups that are protected by the law, which includes women, homosexuals, Negroes, etc. It doesn't matter who it is, but it is hate speech either way: the is no way to justify it.

  • Yes.

    Religious hate speech should indeed be penalized because it is discrimination against religious persons. And no, this does not contradict freedom of speech. "Freedom" of Speech must not go as far as suppressing others and their beliefs, because that's no longer freedom. People are free to hate what they want to hate, but expressing it publicly may not be wise as there are many other people out there who are strong believers and it might hurt them emotionally. This will most definitely NOT promote peace in the society. Look at how the Muslims reacted to that video insulting their Mohammed. Even I, a Catholic, find it hurtful.

  • Religious Speech Hate Should Be Penalized

    Religious hate speeches should indeed be penalized. Hate towards a specific group of people can be seen as prejudice, and last time I checked, the United States is against prejudice, so this should certainly be regulated. However, it also depends on the extent of the hate since some remarks should not be considered as severe.

  • For Peace, please.

    Religious hate speech makes certain groups of people very angry and most of the time they do something to show their anger which can go on and on. Freedom of speech should be there for other things but about religious stuff one should be restricted to keep their point of view within themselves or within their very close community, not public.

  • It should now

    First of all define what you mean by hate speech. Even if you mean saying racist or bigoted statements it should still not be penalized because we have the first Amendment. Once we start regulating what someone says where does it end? Why should we have a special category of speech such as hate speech anyway?

  • Nope

    We have the freedom of speech, and the freedom of religion. So if someone can speak highly of religion, others should also have the right to speak down on religions. Also if I said "Religions are pointless". Would that be considered hate? Because I am only expressing what I believe to be true.

  • No

    Not only is that against free speech, but there's a slippery slope here. Would this law only be used against real hate or would mere disagreement and even scholarly criticism of religion be penalized? "Hate" is a strong word and the government should not be in the business of defining what it means.

  • Freedom of Speech, Anyone?

    This is a slippery slope to be honest. People have the right to hate things, whether it's right or wrong. I don't think 'hate' has a place in the world but it's something we're never going to get rid of. If it's threatening yes I think it should be penalized but if someone is just saying 'I hate Muslims, Catholics, Pagans' whatever. It's just their opinion.. everyone is entitled to one.

  • No

    Freedom of speech is protected by the constitution but we need to make sure that they do not violate other peoples rights when they are doing it. Everyone has the right to believe what they want with out persecution. We can not step on other peoples toes by saying something that would do that.

  • Not unless it's threatening

    As rampant as Islamophobia is in this country right now, you have a right to hate something as long as you aren't threatening it. "I hate Muslims" is a bigoted thing to say but it's merely that, "I hate Muslims so I'm going to go kill one" is when you have yourself an issue. Taking away peoples right to say they dislike something is a free speech slope we really don't want to start going down.

  • Speech versus Actions

    The primary argument against allowing "religious hate speech" seems to be that it might cause opposing groups to take certain actions. People say things most every day that I find offensive, but I don't take violent action in return; and I support their right to say things that do offend me.

    It is actions taken in response to hate speech that should be subject to rule of law, not the speech itself.

  • No why should

    It your only speaking out against a work of fiction , no bible thumper can prove any of the ridiculous claims made in the bible .Bible thumpers do get pretty annoyed at people having a go at them ,maybe it's because deep down they don't believe any of the gibberish in there holy books.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.