• Yes, with a clear definition and suitable sentence

    Outlawing certain groups as "extremists" such as Russia outlawing jehovas witnesses and jailing them is obviously wrong. I would be comfortable by defining extremist views as "putting your ideology over the health of other people". Expressing views such as "I want to kill abortion doctors/jews/muslims" etc would fall under that definition. The sentencd should not be jail time since it has no effect, if not even the opposite effect from what you want, on a persons world view. The only thing that can change your world view is being subjected to new information and being willing to listen to that information. The semtence should be to talk to a "anti radicalizer". Someone with a lot of experience in how radicals think and how to make them see things differently. Someone who the radical person can identify with and form a bond/relationship with and trust. Instinctivley if you are sentenced to talk to someone they will become the enemy, so the first step is to develop a relationship to break down the enemy label. Staying over on dinners, even cooking dinners for and with the convicted person, praying together, talk about trivial things and to be honest, don't lie about your intentions, many of these radical people consider themselves intulectualls, so use that against them. I'm no expert on dealing with extremists, the closest thing I've done is convincing a 50 something year old that chemtrails aren't real using sort of the same tactics (except online) but I'm sure there are people out there who are very good at indoctrinating people to be deradicalized. After all, if there are people really good at spreading extremist views it would be odd if you couldn't do the opposite. This might not be effective at all, but I would like to believe that it would reduce the number of extremists since many of the people commiting terror attacks have already been on a terrorist watchlist or two.

  • Yes, out with the over the top few.

    Extremists only make a lot of noise about things they have no control over. Certain laws and constitutions will not be changed over a few people kicking up dust about how they feel. The country has real issues that need to be settled like our finances and health care and the attention doesn't need to be taken away from that because someone with wild views.

  • Yes, they should

    Yes, I definitely have to agree that extremist views should be outlawed. Extremist views have hardly any legitimate point to bring to the table and usually only stir intense debate that distracts us from whatever goal we are trying to make. Extremists shouldn't be considered because of their outlandish points of view.

  • Yes, extremist views should be outlawed.

    Yes, I think that extremist views should be outlawed since they can lead to corruption and violence within a society. I think that having a view should be protected by the government, but there are those in today's society who take some views too far and become violent when they take on an extremist point-of-view.

  • Two Words: First Amendment

    Even if someones views are "extremist" they are allowed to express those views as long as it is not violent. Once someone uses violence to express their views they lose their protection of the first amendment. Everyone wants to say what other people are allowed to do, as if they are the judges of what's "correct" or "wrong".

  • No, they should not be outlawed.

    Extremist views should not be outlawed. They have the right to think, believe, and express themselves in what ever way that makes them happy. The only time the extremists need to be put down is when they do something to cause harm to others, or verbally assault others. As long as they do not break laws, they are not doing anything wrong.

  • No, it should not.

    Extremist views should not be outlawed. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, and their own views on life. People should be able to freely think however they wish. The only thing they can not and should not be able to do due is actually cause harms, or harassment, to other people.

  • Outlawing views is a violation of the First Amendment.

    Outlawing any views is a violation of the First Amendment right to free speech which is guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States. Holding certain views or ideas is not a crime. Once any society begins to outlaw other viewpoints, no matter how extreme or disagreeable, free speech is abolished. Free speech is the foundation of a free and open society. It is also impossible to outlaw an idea. A government might succeed in keeping people from speaking openly, but that won't stop anyone from harboring extremist views. It is Orwellian to interfere with another persons freedom of thought. We limit freedom of speech at our peril. Once it begins, who knows where it will end. Therefore, extremists views must be allowed in order to preserve free speech and a free society.

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