Skip to main content

View Diary: "Hate Speech" is Not the Same as "Free Speech" (188 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think a lot of people here are missing one thing (5+ / 0-)

    The First Amendment does not give you the right to "free speech" anywhere, any time, or any place.

    What it does is keep the government from restricting your right to speak.

    Private entities, such as blogs, YouTube, companies that you work for and other groups can and do tell you what you can say while in their territory.

    And I disagree completely on the idea that speech cannot hurt you. If you tell your three-year-old child that they are worthless - you really don't think that's going to affect them for the rest of their lives?

    You don't believe that bullying can destroy lives?

    The old saying claims that "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me."

    Wrong.

    Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words can hurt a lifetime. And they can kill.

    Hate speech on the radio or television can drive an already unstable mind to do horrific things. Without that prod, they might otherwise stay within the bounds of humanity.

    Words are all we HAVE. They're our deepest form of communication.

    And I'm betting if someone here said something to you that hurt you deeply - stabbed at an issue that went to the core of your being - you would be hurt and offended.

    "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

    by Diogenes2008 on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 11:20:22 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  i was bullied from second grade (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Noisy Democrat

      through eighth. I know how it feels. I got over it.... actually with a lot of help from school councilors. I GOT HELP.

      •  That's great for you but you (5+ / 0-)

        should apologize to allergywoman for that comment.

        Most of the people taking a hard line against us are firmly convinced that they are the last defenders of civilization... The last stronghold of mother, God, home and apple pie and they're full of shit! David Crosby, Journey Thru the Past.

        by Mike S on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 11:29:58 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  i see what you're saying (0+ / 0-)

          but to do so would be completely anti-thetical to the point I've been trying to make here.

          •  It is worth considering (0+ / 0-)

            that you meant something different to the way the comment actually reads.

            If it were simply poorly worded, and some do think it was, then you might make the point again in a way that doesn't cause offense.

            If the point is that people are able to get over emotional abuse, with the help of counseling, then sure they are.

            The point here is that when that abuse is open, and visible, do we not have the responsibility to halt it?

            We are not talking about disagreement here, the Diary was quite clear on that point. We are talking about the speech that is designed to do nothing other than wound others.

            I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
            but I fear we will remain Democrats.

            Who is twigg?

            by twigg on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 12:23:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Say what? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Wee Mama

            Apologizing for saying something that is offensive is the same as having laws made outlawing hate speach?

            One is legislating speech, the other is common courtesy.

            Most of the people taking a hard line against us are firmly convinced that they are the last defenders of civilization... The last stronghold of mother, God, home and apple pie and they're full of shit! David Crosby, Journey Thru the Past.

            by Mike S on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 12:23:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  i'm not really willing to make the distiction (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Noisy Democrat, VClib, denise b

              between what is merely offensive speech and hate speech. I don't believe that I, any politicians, judges, or bureaucrats is qualified to make that call.

              bullying though.. might be handled under harassment laws. if physical attacks are employed than assault charges. but I would never put some one in jail for just saying things we don't like.

              •  And when the bullying (0+ / 0-)

                is directed towards a racial group, or a group defined by sexual orientation, we are somehow now powerless to stop it?

                That makes no sense at all.

                Terrifying an individual we can deal with, terrifying an entire community not so much?

                I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
                but I fear we will remain Democrats.

                Who is twigg?

                by twigg on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 12:44:51 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  counter it with more speech (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Be Skeptical, VClib

                  .. not speech bans.

                •  "We"-- the people -- are not powerless (7+ / 0-)

                  in the face of speech we find offensive.  We can ridicule it.  We can persuade others that it is offensive.  In the case of a business or business owner, we can refuse to do business with them.  In the case of a politician, we can use their words to campaign against them.  In all cases, we can use our own speech (along with those who share our views) to drown them out and to convince others to support our views.  

                  Allowing a group of elected officials to decide what speech they think is "offensive" enough to be banned is contrary to the most basic principles that this country is based on.  

                  When the speech crosses the line into involving physical violence, that's when the law can and should step in.

                •  also rhe constitution (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  VClib

                  Guarantees individual rights... Not really group rights except for the right of the individual to join groups

      •  So was I. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Wee Mama

        I didn't know I could get help from school councilors. This was quite a while ago. Back then most school officials were very hands-off about bullying.

        It affected me deeply, and others have died because of it.

        Saying it's okay because you got help doesn't cut it, sorry. Not everyone has the access to help - or the knowledge that the help is out there.

        "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

        by Diogenes2008 on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 12:00:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I was bullied, too (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Diogenes2008, Wee Mama

        You do not speak for me personally or the bullied generally. I find it incredible that a person who was actually bullied could be so callous.

        I don't mind if you're straight. Just don't flaunt it in public.

        by Chrislove on Sun Aug 18, 2013 at 02:30:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'd be hurt and offended (4+ / 0-)

      and then I'd get the f*** over it. I would never in a million years want a law passed to prevent people from saying things that hurt and offend me. A website can have policies against certain kinds of comments and that's fine -- you've drawn a good distinction -- but the government has no business being the "play nice" police.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site