• Free speech people

    People have the right to say what they want. If they are not being violent or violating anyone's' rights, they should be able to. There would also be abuse over what defines "hate" speech and politicians would use it as an excuse to censor opposing viewpoints. Insults would be considered "hate" speech. A ban would not be practical, would be abused, and violate freedom.

  • Yes, it is free speech.

    People have the right to say whatever they want. I am ethnically Jewish, but I would support the right of neo-nazi's to march and protest, just as I support the right of the westboro baptist church to protest, even if I was homosexual. If people get stirred up by hate speech and commit violent acts, that is their fault and they are solely held responsible for that.

    It is unpopular speech that needs the most protection.

  • Victims of bullies must use it to counter their bullies

    In a society that allows hate speech it becomes much harder for bullies to target the strong with the intent to limit production, like they did in the 1990s. Online service terms have enabled bullies to reign over others in online communities, and get away with unacceptable behavior. This must end!Legalize hate speech now.

  • Hate speech is free speech

    Even if you hate somebody's opinion, even if it's stupid, they should have the right to express it. It is only fair. By banning hate speech, you are encouraging the government to make further restrictions to hate speech, perhaps banning speech against the government etc. Hate speech is part of free speech, and should be legal.

  • Of course it should

    Whats next? Pff. Wuss liberals, Are people who dont/do believe in god now hate speech? Just because the opinions unpopular. Its their right, get over it crybabies. People can call me anything they want, kids nowadays just need to grow a pair. "an unpopular view is still a view". -my brain

  • Yes, but should be strongly discouraged.

    Banning hate speech actually will probably swell the problem. Look at Europe, even with their laws banning hate speech, there is still more overt intolerance in the continent. At the same time, I don't think it should be encouraged. Hate speech should be allowed but should be strongly stigmatized and discouraged.

  • Freedom of Speech

    People need to learn to accept whatever language people use. Also, in the modern world people get offended way to easily. No one should ever get in trouble for making a politically incorrect joke. The problem is that the liberals teach people to be sensitive to everything and get offended by anything.

  • As much as you don't like it, it's freedom of speech.

    You may have actually never read it, but you use it to defend almost everything... The 1st Amendment. The most quoted, but least read, statement in the world.

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    It does not say you have to right to never be offended. It says the Government can not make laws prohibiting free speech.

  • It already is

    It already is, as long as it doesn't provoke violent reactions. That's why the American Nazi Party is a thing. They marched through a Jewish community with signs. And it was deemed totally legal. But protest IS part of their first amendment rights as long as it's peaceful. We cannot take away their rights unless we make an amendment to the first one.

  • Hate speech hurts.

    People cannot say whatever they want. If a jewish person is walking down the block and a someone yells an obscenity out at him, it hurts. If a gay person is taunted at work or at school, it hurts. Yes, people have the right to protest against laws and other various social issues, but it is wrong to protest against the existence of jews or gays. No person should be forced to endure the fact that there is a whole protest against his being.

    Yes, if victims of hate speech react violently to a protest their it is wrong and they should be held responsible, but think about how they feel. Imagine being told that your race/religion/family is evil or a disease or just doesn't have the right to exist; its a slap in the face. Hopefully you wouldn't have a violent reaction but many people don't have that self-control. At least understand why a victim of hate speech might get violent.

    Until you actually are standing in the victims shoes don't say "I wouldn't mind." Many people end up harming or even killing themselves because they had enough of taunts and insults from other people. Words Hurt.

  • Hate speech is a form of violence, which is itself illegal

    Hate speech is a form of violence, and is as damaging to people (in a different way) as physical assault, which is of course illegal. Hate speech in public violates a personal right that is more important than the right to say what you want in public: namely, the right to go out in public without fear of violence or discriminatory behavior. Hate speech is not just any speech that *could* offend people, it is speech that is known to be offensive and harmful to people of a certain race, sexual orientation or gender. That said, I agree with several of the people who voted YES that the definition of hate speech needs to be clear to avoid the slippery slope.

  • A definite no, but with justification.

    I am opposed to censorship in all forms, no matter what. However, we cannot allow for hate to be legitimized, to be given a platform upon which to gain further support. We've seen in the past what happens when we allow hate groups to grow, when we let them prosper unchecked. 6 million Jews. 4,000 black citizens. 4 little girls in a church. One young woman in a counter-protest movement. How many more must lose their lives because of our ambivalence to do something to stop the hate? Hell, it shouldn't even be protected under the First Amendment, as it has incited violence on many occasions throughout the United States. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. However, there is a difference between an offensive joke and hate speech that has to be addressed. If an individual is making an insensitive joke, it has to be made clear that their ideals and mental processes do not align with their comments or humor. That is where the line must be drawn, as to prevent complete censorship of a whole comedic community. If it is hate speech, and it does align with their actual views, that is where the line must be drawn, and the individual or group responsible for the statement must be held accountable.

  • Hates a strong word

    If hate speeches are legalized then where does it end and why are people filled with so much hate. I do think people should be able to express distaste for something but within reason. I also dont think people are civilized enough for that kind of expression with all the abuse, bullying, and cruelty we have already.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
TheShamelessTruth says2013-07-29T13:53:13.607
It already is? The asker of this question must be Canadian or something.
koon139 says2013-07-29T14:51:23.517
We can't base everything in the US.
TheShamelessTruth says2013-07-29T17:25:44.333
That's what I assumed. That the person asking the question was not American. In that case I don't know how to answer it because it works differently for different countries. I strongly believe in freedom of speech but many countries are doing good with heavy restrictions on it like in Germany where they won't allow nazis because of their past and the fact they want to cut their ties to nazis.