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 ...
He is also telling us what he is afraid of. He is afraid of the truth.
I wonder if he asked the sophisticated Arab diplomat how much the Bible or the religious texts of non-Islamic religions are protected from harm in the Arab world. Oh, not at all, you say? Well then, you can stop whining about the treatment of the Koran in the West. Bibles get burned here too, and that is also protected speech.
So we shouldn’t burn a koran but Hollywood celebrates a homofascist actor who tore pages out of hotel bibles that didn’t belong to him and civic venues had to endure Brian Warner Mary Manson ripping up Christian Bibles and eating their pages on stage at hate rallies under the guise of “Concerts”.
The Left is obvious.
So Auntie Faaaaahs would be locked up for inciting violence against groups? Lynch mob attacks with rocks and sticks on peaceful people?
Not in this Leftist world.
Really so the open avocation of violence against Trump Supporters by the members of the Democrat Fascists in the US House should be prospected as “Hate Speech” Washington Compost?
Another day another example of how it now is the Democrat Fascist Party.
Okay, the left gets to enforce hate speech laws, while the right enforces treason laws.
And anyone who enforces hate speech laws is guilty of treason.
Let’s roll this out and see who wins.
There should not even be hate speech laws.
There are already laws dealing with assault and vandalism, etc.
Being offended by what someone else says does not qualify as a crime.
He is telling us that he and the Left have a problem understanding that personal power comes in large part from taking responsibility for one's actions. For example, by telling us that a violent act by a person can be blamed on the speech of another person, he is telling us that he and the Left lack maturity...they are like children in their thinking. Like "Timmy made me hit him...he called me a bad name."
This particular lack of maturity demonstrates an inability to think logically and clearly. It tell us something that we already know but need to constantly remind ourselves of: the Left is driven primarily by emotion.
That is a major weakness...an Achilles heel.
An army which operates not out of logic and clear reason, but emotion, is an army that is easily defeated.
The Washington compost is the very embodiment of hate speech. And yet, I don’t advocate that it be outlawed. I advocate it be used for bird cage liner and fire starting material.
I’d bet big money tht this clown had no such ideas when the speech being protected was the “artistic statement” known as “piss Chr*st”. I’d bet it never entered his mind to enact laws against free speech then. But then, I’m sure he knows full well that Christians don’t commit violence in retaliation to the sacrillege against our symbology, Holy Book, etc.
America needs common sense licensing and regulation on Commercial Speech for Compensation or Gain, with Severe Penalties for Deliberate False Statements made for compensation or gain while engaged in Commercial Activity.
It is Left-think, baby-think.
It demonstrates that the Left is weak of mind. They are illogical and easily confused.
Taunt them and they will unravel.
Exactly-we alreay know who will decide what’s “hate speech”, and it won’t be whites, Christians, heteroseuals, or any combination thereof. It will be the left through leftist domination of mass media, entertainment, and academia. After all these years, we still can’t get someone in Congress to even propose that taxpayer funding be pulled from PBS, even though they are an unapologetic, unabashed, open propaganda arm of the left.
Hare speech laws are just as unjust as hate crime laws. The ‘hate’ is defined by whatever offends the person making and passing the law. So, it is not objective at all.
For some time, the Progtard DildoCrats have recognized that the pesky Bill of Rights is getting in the way of their goal of total domination.
For more than 180 years, they are unrelenting in their attacks on the:
First Amendment
Free exercise of religion
Freedom of speech
Freedom the press
Right to peaceably assemble
Right to petition for a governmental redress of grievances
Second Amendment
The individual right to keep and bear arms without any infringement, whatsoever
Fourth Amendment
Right to be secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable search and seizures
Fifth Amendment
Rights to due process, protections against double jeopardy and self-incrimination, and protection against unlawful seizures under eminent domain
Sixth Amendment
Rights to a speedy and public trial, trial by an impartial jury, to be informed of criminal charges, to compel witnesses to appear in court, and the assistance of counsel
Ninth Amendment
Rights not enumerated in the Constitution retained by the people
Tenth Amendment
Powers reserved to the states and the people
The good news is that they have not yet tried to quarter soldiers in our homes (Third Amendment) and they will forever hold sacrosanct the Seventh Amendment to take care of the lawyers.
However, they can’t wait to violate the Eighth Amendment when it comes time to settle our hash.
We can either protect our Bill of Rights by pursuing unrestricted Lawfare (indictment, arrest, conviction, prison, fines, civil torts, and asset forfeiture) on those who seek to destroy it, or we can lose our nation.
Why wouldn't you want to protect that? It's just pointing out the evil of Islam.
Having lived abroad in 4 European countries where they did not have a first amendment and did not have such robust protections of free speech, I came to the conclusion that the constitution was a great thing, they were worse off for not having the rights that we as Americans enjoy and that I did not want my country to become like theirs.
So-called “hate speech” should absolutely be protected. That’s not because we like it, that’s because we know any government power to restrict it would immediately be abused. What qualifies as “hate”? Who gets to determine that? Why only the categories chosen and not other categories? That choice alone is inherently political.
If you don’t like it WAPO, feel free to move to some other country that allows its citizens’ rights to be infringed like that. I don’t want to be just like everybody else. I’m happy to be an American.
WRONG!
In such a world, freedom of speech and the free exchange of ideas is more important than ever!
The "design flaw" is NOT in freedom of speech. It is in tolerating--and thus condoning--the violence.
It started with opinions that violate “political correctness”.
Now those same opinions are hate speech.
Soon, those same opinions will have legal penalties applied to them.
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.