Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Disgrace: 51% of Democrats, 37% of Republicans support making “hate speech” a crime
Hotair ^ | 05/20/2015 | AllahPundit

Posted on 05/20/2015 1:04:01 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

YouGov conducted a nearly but not quite identical poll (more on that a minute) on this topic last October. I made a big deal about it and have had liberal friends ever since telling me that it’s a fluke result, that most Democrats don’t really support banning hate speech, and that I’m generally being alarmist. Well, here’s YouGov’s sequel. I’m done entertaining doubts that this is a real problem.

Don’t start hissing at the left yet, though. I hate to say it but it ain’t their party that’s growing in support for making hate speech a crime.

hs

The question YouGov asked last year was similar but not quite exactly the same. In October, they asked whether people would support a law criminalizing public comments that “advocate genocide or hatred” against a group based on race, sex, religion, ethnicity, or orientation. They dropped the genocide part in their new poll, which, you would think, would lead to less support for criminalizing hate speech. After all, you can imagine how someone might be leery of banning a concept as hazy as “hate” while feeling more comfortable banning advocacy of a more concrete course of action, like extermination. I wouldn’t ban either but I can understand why the latter would trouble people more than the former. Instead there’s more support for criminalizing hate speech now, with 41 percent in favor versus 37 percent opposed compared to a 36/38 split last October.

But as I say, it’s not Democrats who are driving it. Compare the partisan numbers above to the partisan numbers from October:

yg2

Democratic support for banning hate speech hasn’t increased at all; on the contrary, Dems are a bit more likely to oppose a ban than they were seven months ago, a rational reaction to the creepy spectacle of western media outlets self-censoring images of Mohammed cartoons after the Charlie Hebdo massacre. It’s Republicans and independents who are slowly warming to hate-speech bans. Indie opposition has dropped 12 points, with an increase of eight points in support. GOPers are now 12 points more likely to support hate-speech bans than they were last year.

There’s movement within other demographic groups too.

hs-race

Support among whites and Latinos has increased slightly since October, when they split 32/43 and 49/20, respectively. The major shift is among blacks, who split 44/34 last time and now break massively in favor of banning hate speech, 62/14. Maybe that’s simple statistical error in polling a smallish subgroup, maybe it’s a reaction to heightened racial tensions this year, maybe it’s something else. But those are the numbers.

The age data is also … interesting:

hs-age

The 30-44 and 45-64 groups haven’t moved much since October. The big movers are young adults and — surprise — senior citizens. The former went from an even 38/37 split last year to a 42/26 divide now, a double-digit drop in opposition to criminalizing hate speech. More shocking, the 65+ crowd went from mild 35/39 opposition in October to strong 49/33 support now. That’s got to be statistical error, right? If not, the only explanation I can come up with is that seniors are watching Christian bakers and florists who refuse to cater gay weddings being hit with nasty, vitriolic boycotts from gay-rights activists and concluding that banning “hate speech” against religion would protect those business owners somehow. If that’s what’s happening here, they’re very, very naive about whom the state will favor and disfavor under a hate-speech criminal regime. If anything, it’s the business owners who’ll do time for their “hateful” refuse to provide services to a gay couple that’s getting married.

Exit question: I can understand why progressives would want a legal cudgel to silence their enemies but I can’t understand why conservatives increasingly would. Even if you don’t value free speech enough to abhor that sort of cudgel on principle, surely you understand that the “politically incorrect” will be the main target of prosecutions. Why on earth would you enable this?


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: constitution; democrats; hatespeech; hatespeechlaw; republicans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last
To: SeekAndFind

For liberals, hate speech is when a Conservative opens up their mouth..if liberals could, they would ban Conservatives from speaking that is their wish..meanwhile liberals are the most hateful pieces of filth you could ever meet


21 posted on 05/20/2015 1:19:29 PM PDT by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Hi There Senators and Representatives ... Why do you Hate Me?


22 posted on 05/20/2015 1:19:38 PM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

It is more than America ever had before ... It is another lesson learned ... Don’t allow America to Fade, please!


23 posted on 05/20/2015 1:23:33 PM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

Tears for America’s Citizens ... Sarah ...


24 posted on 05/20/2015 1:24:39 PM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The problem with telling the average person you don’t agree with an opposing point of view shows how stupid so many of them are. In this instance are very likely conversation would go something like this:

Conservative: I really disagree with this law. It’s an unconstitutional attack on free speech.

Retort: Why do you support hate speech? Are you a racist?


25 posted on 05/20/2015 1:25:13 PM PDT by BJ1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJ1

Guess we should not say ‘save your breath’ ... I’m waving off the ‘One’ I can’t keep ‘dragging on’ with this sinking stone ... to ‘wishes and words’ save ‘your breath and lies’


26 posted on 05/20/2015 1:27:23 PM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Damn that pesky Constitution!


27 posted on 05/20/2015 1:28:09 PM PDT by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

it may as well be done ... America Tried ...


28 posted on 05/20/2015 1:29:18 PM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Don Corleone

and why are we not shooting yet?


29 posted on 05/20/2015 1:29:55 PM PDT by no-to-illegals (Do what is Right ... Take This Freepathon Over the Top!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The Liberalization, the destruction, of America continues onward at an astounding pace.


30 posted on 05/20/2015 1:33:34 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

You know it will not include hate speech against whites and Christians and conservatives.


31 posted on 05/20/2015 1:34:52 PM PDT by GeronL (NEW ARRIVALS -> 99 cents buy here: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/541331)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“Hate speech” against white males will be made exempt from prosecution.


32 posted on 05/20/2015 1:35:52 PM PDT by Signalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
a law criminalizing public comments that “advocate genocide or hatred” against a group based on race, sex, religion, ethnicity, or orientation.

Collective rights that belong to a group are false rights.A group can have no rights other than the rights of ihs individual members. In a free society,the "rights" of any group are derived from its members through their voluntary, individual choice and contractual agreement, and are merely the application of these individual rights to a specific undertaking. A group as such has no rights. A man can neither acquire new rights by belonging to a group nor lose those rights which he does possess. The principle of natural rights is the only moral base of all groups or associations.

In a rational free society, force and mind are opposites.If the government, which has a monopoly on coercion, undertakes to enforce the prohibition of an idea, any idea, whether true or false, it thereby reverses its function. It becomes the enemy , not the protector, of the free mind, and thus loses moral basis for existing.

33 posted on 05/20/2015 1:45:16 PM PDT by mjp ((pro-{God, reality, reason, egoism, individualism, natural rights, limited government, capitalism}))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The good news is that after suing you into bankruptcy they’ll have a nice warm place waiting for you with three squares a day all provided at government expense.


34 posted on 05/20/2015 1:49:56 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

TRUTH: It’s the new HATE SPEECH.


35 posted on 05/20/2015 1:51:40 PM PDT by JimRed (Excise the cancer before it kills us; feed & Ifwater the Tree of Liberty! TERM LIMITS NOW & FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They’re going to take our free speech.

And all we’re going to get in return is a condescending lecture about how it will make America a better place.


36 posted on 05/20/2015 1:52:03 PM PDT by Tzimisce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

well since most of it comes from the left.....


37 posted on 05/20/2015 3:19:45 PM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (0bama's agenda—Divide and conquer seems to be working.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The problem is determining what hate speech is. It will be entirely different between different people. How do you prove it? it is too subjective to be put on the books as law. It is the open door which leads to “thought” police.


38 posted on 05/20/2015 5:04:55 PM PDT by elpadre (AfganistaMr Obama said the goal was to "disrupt, dismantle and defeat al-hereQaeda" and its allies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The mercenary freak AllahPundit trying to get more hits to his crappy web site in order to collect more cash from his left wing buddies at Google.


39 posted on 05/20/2015 5:08:12 PM PDT by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So-called hate speech will be outlawed unless the supreme count musters the balls to strike it down. It’s already outlawed in Canada and much of Europe.


40 posted on 05/20/2015 6:27:09 PM PDT by matt1234
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson