Amazon.com Widgets

Should we allow racism under the right of freedom of speech

Asked by: RhysWatkins
  • Talking and doing are two different things

    You can say anything you want under freedom of speech. The problem comes when you act upon those things, (for example, physically abusing a person because they are Asian). There's no one who can tell us what we are "allowed" to say about other people. You might lose your job, lose a lot of friends, etc. of course, but that's your choice.

  • To a degree.

    They should have the right to be able to convey their message, however there should be limits to how far they can go. There is a significant difference between "studies have shown that African Americans, as a race as a whole, is less intelligent, less driven to work, more likely to commit crimes, and do drugs," and "Them damn f***in' N*****s are nothing but lazy a** drug addicts!" You can see that they ultimately convey the same message, but one should be allowed, one not.

  • Yes, Within Reason

    The right to freedom of speech is extremely important. We need to allow freedom of speech. If someone feels that they have to discriminate against other races, for whatever reason, I believe that they should have a right to say that. However if what they are saying harms, pressurises or discrimination against a specific race, then they should be prosecuted and punished necessarily. We could use the example of Andrew Bolt and his racist column against part Aboriginal people. He should have the right to say that, but because it applied pressure and discrimination to those specific peoples he should definitely be punished.

  • If you're talking about freedom of speech

    People already protest racist things. Haven't you heard of KKK rallies? The Black Hebrew Israelites? It's nothing new, people have been raising their voices against specific races. They are protected by the first amendment but it can really get people pissed off a lot. There are acts and amendments that do not allow intimidation and threatening acts on people based on their race however.

  • Yes under the first amendment

    Racism is a bad thing I think we all agree on that, but being racist is part of freedom of speech. Every one has the right to be racist, if they want to. It may even be part of their belief (cough) Nazis (cough). These beliefs are negative and bad but part of the common American rights of freedom of belief and religion.

  • Because racism is inevitable

    Racism cannot be stopped dude. It wont ever happen, so let it happen because that is when people can realize what they are doing is wrong. Dont simply just say bad stuff, and like i gotta write this essay for ap lang and its about this too lol. Anyways yeah racism cannot eb stopped

  • The right to free expression should not be infringed

    Silencing others for their views - regardless of whether or not said views can be construed as bigoted - is a slippery slope. Ray Bradbury, renowned author, wrote about a world at the bottom of this slope: a world in which written ideals that could be considered even remotely controversial are burned to cinder, and those who attempt to uphold said ideals are killed or forced into hiding. Do we want a world like that in our future?

    If anything, racists should be allowed to speak their mind. As long as they aren't inciting violence, the dialogue they produce can give the more sane of us opportunities to practice denouncing such talk, giving us ample opportunity to stamp it out with direct opposition. Otherwise, such beliefs will be left to fester, unchallenged.

  • I can insult you

    And you can insult me back. Yes, racism is wrong, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't allow it. The same free speech that allows racism allows anti-racism. Of course, that only applies to speech. Racist actions that break any law should not be allowed. ​​​​ ​ ​ ​​​​ ​ ​ ​​​​ ​ ​

  • Imagine this situation:

    A group of people are protesting a new law being passed, they have permits to protest peacefully, and they are harming or harassing anyone. Then a group of counter protesters come up and attack them, killing a few of the members. Who do you think is the bad guy? What if I was to tell you that the people protesting the law were the KKK, they were protesting the ban of the Confederate flag, and the people who beat them up where all supporters of racial equality? Does that make what the second group did any less wrong? We can't pick and choose who can speak and who can't just because we don't like what they're saying. If they hurt someone, or go out of their way to harass certain individuals, then we can stop them, but not if they are being civilized, and using their constitutional rights to their full extent. If we take away even a single persons freedom of speech, even if they're person in the world, we open the door to let some else take away ours.

  • Yes man YES

    Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yesyes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yesyes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes

  • Imagine if you were black

    Many police officers do not care for black people when they go missing! All the people that said you are allound to be racist wake up one day with black skin and you will know how it feels. I bet ( to all the people that said yes ) if someone starts being mean to you you will tell them to stop. So much for "freedom of speech " so you see it's just like being mean to the other race! If you don't want to be raped and murded neither do the black people. So that's why I think blacks should have there freedom!

  • The right to free expression does not give the right to ignore other rights.

    Article 7 states that 'all are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.' To allow racist bigotry and hatred to be expressed as a valid opinion under article 19 gives it the appearance of credibility and allows the opportunity to incite others to discriminate against or attack people portrayed as inferior. If we allow racists to speak under freedom of expression then it opens the way for all other forms of hatred to be preached. Do want to give Al'Qaeda the right to preach openly in your country?

    Posted by: chui
  • Degradation of societal values and critical faculties

    The very fact that side proposition is thinking of allowing people to even think of allowing racist remarks to be made, under the banner of "Freedom of Speech", shows that they are not thinking about the possible ramifications to the self caused by this drop in moral standards. By allowing people to commit such atrocities, their side is doing more than just harming the victims of such abuse, which in itself infringes upon the rights of another group of individuals in society - a point to be raised later. However, even more pernicious in their policy is the imparting of a symbolic message to society at large that such any allowance can even be made for such a crime. The state in society will definitely snowball downhill into a collection of possible impacts - the rise of "hate speech", possible sectarian violence, and racial riots, to name but a few.

    Now, onto the point about how this infringes upon the rights of another group in society - upholding a right is legal only to the extent that it does not infringe upon the rights of anybody else. Clearly, minorities' rights to freedom and protection are thoroughly violated here. Hypothetically speaking, we would not allow people to go around on the street punching pedestrians in the face for no rhyme or reason. Similarly, we do not condone racism or racist remarks precisely because we violate someone's rights, and that is just not allowed.

    Lastly, racism has a profound impact on the development of any society. The abolishing of slavery by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Was simply an event representing the desire to abolish all notions of race-based superiority in society. The fact that this massive movement was, to a large extent, successful, shows that racism, regardless of the banner it is cloaked under, should never be tolerated.

    Simply like we do not allow people to steal under the banner of "Right to Protection"(I was hungry, and had to protect myself), or people to shoot everyone whom they think may harbour a grudge against them for the same reason, our side does not condone racism under any pretence or façade. Ultimately, one of the signs of societal progress is the understanding that racism is not acceptable whatsoever.

    For all these reasons, I am very proud to oppose.

  • It is terrible

    Don't be a racist lil fuck it is bad so don't be a racist think of others rather then yourself you dirty whore thank you very much for reading this I appreciate it lots very much thank you I'm finished now good bye racist people out in the word yes

  • Racist words promote racist actions

    Australia July August 2016: A double dissolution election sees the rise of anti-muslim political agendas. We have a breakfast show host who is loving the ratings of spewing bigotted ideas under the banner of "saying it like it is" and a politician who claims "understanding ordinary Australians". In both these cases people who receive income for their words are choosing bigotry over reason and claiming that it is freedom of speech... But inciting racist thought promotes racist actions. People paid for their words ought to have a greater responsibility in choosing them. Acknowledging that racism is NOT covered under a fundamental right to free speech would mean these people had to choose their words better.

    Bill Leak, a political cartoonist with an incredibly long career has just been slammed for a cartoon that suggests that black people in this country want the government to take greater responsibility for their children than they do themselves. That is racist. It is also "telling it like it is", yes... And he is supported by a lot of people who like to say "but it's true! He is only telling it like it is." But he is not telling it like is should be. He has an opportunity NOT to denigrate aboriginal parents and instead he DOES denigrate them . That is racist before it is freedom of expression, and should be condemned.

  • Shaun chinyangahi, I'm a single gay male, wanna hook up.

    Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky, Wanna get freaky,

  • Yes, under legislation

    (In Australia), the legislation currently is that if you're racist, you can get in trouble with the law. What it should be instead is that being racist can't get you in trouble in regards to the law. However, instead of just yelling "THATS RACIST" when someone is racist, the other person should debate the racist person's opinion. Treat racism like any other opinion and debate if you wish or just be like "Yea, whatever mate". It still should be frowned upon though in society.

  • Freedom Doesn't Mean Stepping on Others

    People think freedom of speech give them a free pass to do what ever they want. Freedom of speech though does not prevent someone from facing civil lawsuit for libel, or prosecution for causing a public disturbance where people get hurt. Freedom of speech allows a person to voice their opinions, but racism isn't simply an opinion. The way said person voices their opinion is as if their opinion is fact, and thus they are subject to libel and defamation laws.

  • Racism is extremely unnecessary

    When some ones darker, why does that mean your better. Racism and reverse racism or completely out of the idea of peace. Give people free speech, and they should be responsible enough not to do that.People talk about peace, then make a joke about Mexicans coming over the border to much. Not funny

  • Absolutely Not, But...

    It already is. And it will be for quite some time. The racists don't want to lose their right to be racist. If they lost that then everything about their mental state would crumble. Racists need to think, feel, and speak racist thoughts in order to maintain their false sense of entitlement. Take that away from them and they will quite simply implode.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
UnKarmafied says2014-04-01T13:49:17.680
Racism is already allowed under the freedom of speech. It is socially disdained, but you can't go to jail for being racist. You can however go to jail for doing things that stem from your racism, but are not racist in itself.