Posted on 10/30/2019 4:36:36 AM PDT by C19fan
When I was a journalist, I loved Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.’s assertion that the Constitution and the First Amendment are not just about protecting “free thought for those who agree with us but freedom for the thought that we hate.” But as a government official traveling around the world championing the virtues of free speech, I came to see how our First Amendment standard is an outlier. Even the most sophisticated Arab diplomats that I dealt with did not understand why the First Amendment allows someone to burn a Koran. Why, they asked me, would you ever want to protect that?
It’s a fair question. Yes, the First Amendment protects the “thought that we hate,” but it should not protect hateful speech that can cause violence by one group against another. In an age when everyone has a megaphone, that seems like a design flaw.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Aka Hecklers' Veto.
Let the debate begin. Hate speech has a less violent, but nearly as damaging, impact in another way: It diminishes tolerance.
As in quoting the Bible on sexual mores.
As I expected the man reeks of elite credentials: Princeton and Oxford educated including Rhodes scholar. The most ironic item is he led the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. Now he wants to eviscerate the Bill of Rights.
Wonderful. Then anyone who reads or recites the koooran would be thrown in jail.
My God, the riff riff are piping up!! Can't have that!
This guy wrote a book called “Information Wars: How We Lost the Global Battle Against Disinformation and What We Can Do About It”
Very anti-Trump.
This person can go #### themselves.
As I get older, I feel I have less to lose.
I WANT everything to become civil again.
I would LOVE that. A congress and people who disagree and get heated but respect each other and have discourse to solve problems.
Doesn’t look like that’s gonna be.
2 things aren’t happening.
NO MOTHER ####ER IS TOUCHING MY GAS GUZZLING CHALLENGER.
And NO ONE is telling what I can or can’t say.
I don’t care if 50,000 ####ing people hear it. And it’s awful.
but it should not protect hateful speech that can cause violence by one group against another
Under that standard it is no longer a free speech amendment! It would have prevented the exact speech that began our revolution and brought about the Constitution! T
Anyone who opposes hate speech simply wishes to suppress political speech.
End of story.
I wonder how SCOTUS would rule on a "hate speech" law?
Americans need to toughen up, buttercups! Anything any snowflake disagrees with is “hate speech”.
Go step on a Lego, Richard Stengel.
I've been triggered by your mention of a Dodge Challenger. I'm reporting you to the Department of Flowery Rhetoric.
Man in MAGA Hat Attacked: ‘Go Back to Russia, You F*cking Communist!
Note the ages of perp and vic.
And Redstate, do a deep dive on the perp. You might find it interesting.
Free speech must be absolute!
If not, it becomes defined at the changing whimsy of whatever particular entity that happens to be in vogue at the moment.
If certain speech could even “diminish tolerance” and causes someone to act out against another so be it, you punish the act NOT the tenuously asserted “cause”.
There is no middle ground.....You either have freedom of speech or you do not. Once altered, you’ll never ever regain it.
I can’t stand hearing all the hateful things libs say, but the only recourse is to argue with and rebuke them. These crybabies believe everyone should agree with them. Also, who gets to define what “hate” speech is?
And the arbiter as to what constitutes “hate speech” is . . . (wait for it) . . . Richard Stengel! Ta-Da!
Richard, I hate you!
LOL
They’re already out front!!
I wonder if Bezos reads the drivel published by WaPo?
It is never the “speaker” of the speech that causes the violence....it is the reaction of the person hearing it. The author of this piece is an idiot.
IF the dreams of the Left and the wapo became law, you'd be convicted of a "hate speech" crime for this post.
As would a good majority of the posts on FR!
We should take this seriously.
Who would have thought that a HATE CRIME law, essentially double jeopardy, would be created.
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.