Given that they've been thoroughly propagandized by the likes of the author, perhaps so. It isn't something to be proud of.
In truth there is nothing about "hate speech" that isn't simply "speech I don't like." The author offers no other criteria, only that there are protected classes and everyone else is fair game. Thanks but no thanks.
Exactly. Leaving aside most hate crime laws, which really amount to sentencing upgrades after The general standard is when speech leads to an imminent illegal act, or constitutes individual harassment.
For example, should a Rabbi incite his congregation to "kill the Muslims" on an ongoing basis, and his congregation leaves the synagogue and immediately kill a local Muslim, the Rabbi might well have some liability. Should the unlawful act occur days later, he's probably in the clear, since the act wasn't imminent. I wouldn't be surprised to see that aspect revisited one day.
I used a Rabbi and his congregation as an example so as not to offend, however substitutions could be made to make the example more relevant on the world stage.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
In not so many years this kids will be adults and voting!
Marxism and its weapon, government schools, are our nation’s most important and serious threat.
I seriously mean this!
Why are people asleep?