Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Please read the forum rules before posting.



Check if you are posting in the correct category.



The Off Topic section is not meant for discussing Cookie Clicker.

Should Hate Speech be Legal?

Jarr2003Jarr2003 Member Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited August 24 in Off Topic
"its like every 5 AS you require 10x more souls." -uiomancant
My Pokefarm Q Account
Dashnet Plays NationStates: Play now! Please...

Should Hate Speech be Legal? 20 votes

Yes
70%
Jarr2003GoldraOrcaguyChaotic_NeutralFrank_3everestChisakoCarmoryManiklasBloodScourgepuddingfaxLava_EntityIan5dparejaFishnet 14 votes
No
25%
adam_antichristidciceklausQuentinPlaysMCShadowofReverse 5 votes
Tellurium/Indifferent
5%
Brainstorm 1 vote

Comments

  • puddingfaxpuddingfax Member Posts: 1
    Yes
    Considering that certain individuals consider Trump support to be so....
  • BrainstormBrainstorm Member Posts: 10,259 ✭✭✭✭
    Tellurium/Indifferent
    Not in front of children who don't know how to use words properly
    "Calm your caps, bro." -Brainstorm

    the following link is the best thing that could happen to you: http://forum.dashnet.org/discussions/tagged/brainstormgame

    Currently managing a large-based forum game.. DashNet RPG! Play it now: http://forum.dashnet.org/discussion/15882/dashnet-rpg-dashnets-greatest-forum-game-of-all-time
    Dashnet RPG Pastebin: https://pastebin.com/6301gzzx
  • Jarr2003Jarr2003 Member Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yes

    Not in front of children who don't know how to use words properly

    So you're saying that people should be arrested for saying "fuck" in front of children?
    "its like every 5 AS you require 10x more souls." -uiomancant
    My Pokefarm Q Account
    Dashnet Plays NationStates: Play now! Please...
  • idcidc Member Posts: 112 ✭✭✭
    edited August 26
    No
    It isn't legal in my country and I am thankful for that. Humans abuse the right of free speech far too much to deserve it.

    Edit:
    Basically what the below post says.
    Hate speech needs to be defined because each person has a different definition.
    For me hate speech is about inciting hatred or targeting someone with abuse. Sending someone multiple messages saying hateful things about their race/religion/sexuality/disability/gender (identity)/anything else I forgot, is wrong.
    Making 1 joke saying all muslims are terrorists is fine. Trying to stir up hatred of muslims is not.
    Post edited by idc on
    BEETLE there is! While the ROOMS here not!
  • ChisakoChisako Moderator, Helpful, Cool, Conversationalist, Funny, Cake Posts: 1,042 Mod
    Yes
    Jarr2003 said:

    Not in front of children who don't know how to use words properly

    So you're saying that people should be arrested for saying "fuck" in front of children?
    Hate speech is a bit more than just insults and swearing.

    While I say "Yes, it should be legal" I also say, there should be a clear line for everyone when hate speech actually counts as hate speech.

    In addition, stuff like "You are an asshole, imo" is still just an insult and thus, the argument about free speech is bullshit. And I don't think it's hate speech by default.
    You should have the right to insult an individual for a given reason. (let's say someone robs you or damages you/your property, you should be free to call them an asshole without "hate speech" applying here)
    My argument here is that it acts as a vent. If people were no longer allowed to verbally fight back, they'd start to murder each other eventually, because there is no alternative option.
    Hate speech though, imo, starts when it gets extreme, like racism or if you act insulting towards a religion as a whole. It's insult towards many people at once without a proper reason. And with that you only cause problems, stir more hate and you are not even giving your opinion because you don't know everyone that you talk about.
    And that part is just wrong and stupid.

    And while I have my own opinion about certain groups within the world's population, I still think it is important to treat people as individuals. Insulting a nazi for doing nazi things, seems perfectly fine. Hating on ISIS members for being terrorrists, also fine, and so on.
    Saying all muslims are bad for being muslims is wrong, cause you don't know shit about each person here. And that last one would be what actual hate speech is. It's just stupid and wrong.

    So clear standards about "What hate speech is" would be necessary first before you should ban it.

    Now a fun fact: Just writing this is already recognized as hate speech by german standards. Now you tell me: Is it hate speech in your opinion?

    I read and compared a lot about this topic and with just using common sense, multiple people around the globe come to the same or very similiar conclusion. So why is it, that some of our respective governments are setting up bullshit laws about it? I wonder.

    (I'm not expecting a serious conversation about it, but maybe it makes some people think, that would be great)
    "You hit the box with maniklas, OMG, IT OPENS! Wait, that was maniklas, wrong side."~brainstorm
    "Please respect the Rules. You can look them up at any time:
    Rules for Off-Topic Section | Rules for Playground | Rules for Cookie Clicker Section"~me
  • Frank_3everestFrank_3everest Member Posts: 1,501 ✭✭✭
    edited August 25
    Yes
    Edit: Oops... I misread that as ILLEGAL. MY BAD.

    Certain types of hate speech should most definitely be illegal. Spreading hate and threats of violence toward a certain group of people is not protected under free speech at all. Want to know why?

    Well... there are actually limitations on free speech, such as CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER. Threatening ethnic/religious/sexual orientation/other groups with violence and hatred is clear and present danger for the targets.
    Post edited by Frank_3everest on
    You can't make a joke with my own language and expect me to get it. I'm not that smart!-@Dasbloody
    "I took things to fart"-@KhantStopButtnugget
    Pantaloons are pretty much man skirts. Even though they aren't. -@MiningcookiesVIII
    Congratules! Your reward is this paper cup. -@DoomlordKravoka

    Dragon cave profile up in here- http://dragcave.net/user/Frank_Eeverest
  • QuentinPlaysMCQuentinPlaysMC Member Posts: 387 ✭✭✭
    No
    Under the assumption that by "hate speech" you mean "all of X group must die" then no, it should not be legal.

    Those sorts of things can only do harm.
    Anyways back to writing The tree portal.
  • erdbeereerdbeere Member, Helpful Posts: 3,385 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Chisako said:

    [...]
    Now a fun fact: Just writing this is already recognized as hate speech by german standards.
    [...]

    How so?
  • Jarr2003Jarr2003 Member Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yes
    Jarr2003 said:

    Not in front of children who don't know how to use words properly

    So you're saying that people should be arrested for saying "fuck" in front of children?
    Just to clarify, I was joking when I said this. I didn't actually mean I consider that hate speech.
    idc said:

    It isn't legal in my country and I am thankful for that. Humans abuse the right of free speech far too much to deserve it.

    Edit:
    Basically what the below post says.
    Hate speech needs to be defined because each person has a different definition.
    For me hate speech is about inciting hatred or targeting someone with abuse. Sending someone multiple messages saying hateful things about their race/religion/sexuality/disability/gender (identity)/anything else I forgot, is wrong.
    Making 1 joke saying all muslims are terrorists is fine. Trying to stir up hatred of muslims is not.

    I have to disagree with you on this. It doesn't matter whether it's offensive or not, whether humans abuse free speech or not, ultimately it is still a human right. The right to free speech is a necessity, and attempting to limit such a thing because you don't want people's feelings to be hurt is a short sighted and ultimately not even effective "solution." Seriously, think about it. We all hate the Westboro Baptist Church (for example), but why? Because they say crap like "god hates fags." But when the Westboro Baptist Church can't share their beliefs, no matter how backwards they are, it becomes easy to forget just how bad they really are. Furthermore, when they can't share their beliefs, it just gives them more ground to stand on. Like I've said before, groups like the Westboro Baptist Church need to be allowed to say stuff like "god hates fags" because most people, when they hear that, they immediately understand why the Westboro Baptist Church is so hated.

    Furthermore, why the hell would you trust politicians to say what is free speech and what is hate speech. You yourself have said that all politicians are corrupt, yet you seem to support the idea of them deciding what is okay to be said, and what is not? When you have people in office who say that safety is more important than human rights, why would you ever support the idea that these people should be allowed to control the very things that you say? It's only so long before someone tries to change what is considered "hate speech" in the UK, and it's only a downward spiral from there. Free speech is a necessity, whether you like it or not.

    Edit: Oops... I misread that as ILLEGAL. MY BAD.

    Certain types of hate speech should most definitely be illegal. Spreading hate and threats of violence toward a certain group of people is not protected under free speech at all. Want to know why?

    Well... there are actually limitations on free speech, such as CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER. Threatening ethnic/religious/sexual orientation/other groups with violence and hatred is clear and present danger for the targets.

    I dunno where you live, but in America, hate speech is 100% free speech. You seem to be referring to threats, which are considered illegal, at least when said threats are considered serious and dangerous.

    Under the assumption that by "hate speech" you mean "all of X group must die" then no, it should not be legal.

    Those sorts of things can only do harm.

    Just because something is purely harmful does not mean it should be illegal.
    "its like every 5 AS you require 10x more souls." -uiomancant
    My Pokefarm Q Account
    Dashnet Plays NationStates: Play now! Please...
  • dparejadpareja Member Posts: 144 ✭✭
    edited August 27
    Yes
    Yes, up to the limit of causing or advocating immediate harm.

    What I don't want is for free speech to be eroded to the point where harsh but legitimate criticism (for instance, pointing out the egregious misdeeds of various religions or members thereof) is on the border between allowable and illegal speech, because it could be taken by some to be a justification for violent behaviour.

    In general, I'm opposed to hate speech laws because I think they border on thoughtcrime.

    I support restricting speech on the basis of copyright, trademark, libel, slander (with truth as an absolute defence for libel and slander), and direct calls for violence or speech that would reasonably lead to an immediate threat of harm (this is where the old, tired "fire in a crowded theatre" line falls, because that is liable to incite a riot which would cause harm), but not on a broader, more amorphous notion of "hate speech." (EDIT: So, as I've seen it put, given that we do accept all of those restrictions, at this point we're just quibbling over the details.)

    I support the right of people to say what they will, within the above bounds, without fear of governmental sanction, because I want that right--and other rights--to be there to protect me against governmental action when I need them to.
    Post edited by dpareja on
  • ManiklasManiklas Member Posts: 1,925 ✭✭✭
    Yes
    What chisy said
    Is god a cookie, or is the cookie a god?
    The world may never know
    "You have now, officially broken the game,"-Maniklas
    "Okay, ANYWAY, yes, I am a magician,"-RunninginReverse
    """"My game will be playable on all Samsung Microwaves with firmware update 5.3.2 and up." - Audiot" - RunningInReverse" - Purge" - Agubhagu
    Adopt one today! Adopt one today!
  • idcidc Member Posts: 112 ✭✭✭
    No
    Jarr2003 said:


    Furthermore, why the hell would you trust politicians to say what is free speech and what is hate speech. You yourself have said that all politicians are corrupt, yet you seem to support the idea of them deciding what is okay to be said, and what is not? When you have people in office who say that safety is more important than human rights, why would you ever support the idea that these people should be allowed to control the very things that you say? It's only so long before someone tries to change what is considered "hate speech" in the UK, and it's only a downward spiral from there. Free speech is a necessity, whether you like it or not.

    I don't trust them one bit and they do go too far in the UK to stop debates. For a long time people were too scared to talk about immigration due to being labelled racist for even being against free movement and mass immigration.

    But for me it is too far in the other direction in the US. Somewhere in the middle is better.

    But here people are usually only charged if they are trying to stir up hatred (eg. the WBC) or they target someone. Someone just saying their views on a website is unlikely to be charged.

    I'm still thankful that the WBC members are banned from coming here.

    I grew up in a country with laws against hate so it is normal to me and completely free speech is an alien concept since I know what humans do with that right. So we'll never agree.
    BEETLE there is! While the ROOMS here not!
  • Jarr2003Jarr2003 Member Posts: 3,784 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yes
    idc said:

    Jarr2003 said:


    Furthermore, why the hell would you trust politicians to say what is free speech and what is hate speech. You yourself have said that all politicians are corrupt, yet you seem to support the idea of them deciding what is okay to be said, and what is not? When you have people in office who say that safety is more important than human rights, why would you ever support the idea that these people should be allowed to control the very things that you say? It's only so long before someone tries to change what is considered "hate speech" in the UK, and it's only a downward spiral from there. Free speech is a necessity, whether you like it or not.

    I don't trust them one bit and they do go too far in the UK to stop debates. For a long time people were too scared to talk about immigration due to being labelled racist for even being against free movement and mass immigration.

    But for me it is too far in the other direction in the US. Somewhere in the middle is better.

    But here people are usually only charged if they are trying to stir up hatred (eg. the WBC) or they target someone. Someone just saying their views on a website is unlikely to be charged.

    I'm still thankful that the WBC members are banned from coming here.

    I grew up in a country with laws against hate so it is normal to me and completely free speech is an alien concept since I know what humans do with that right. So we'll never agree.
    I think it's important to accept that there's hate in the world, rather than censoring it. I don't think it helps anything regardless. It's like throwing a blanket onto a fire. Sometimes it will kill the fire, but other times the fire will just burn through it and become larger.

    But yeah, I doubt we will agree on this subject anytime soon. We both view the world extremely differently, and at most we'll only agree to disagree on this.
    "its like every 5 AS you require 10x more souls." -uiomancant
    My Pokefarm Q Account
    Dashnet Plays NationStates: Play now! Please...
Sign In or Register to comment.