"Hate speech"

[MaryL]

I have to wonder, HOW is "HATE" (whatever, speech or crime) even a valid standard in our judiciary system? Clearly it is subjective. It's astounding that it is allowed NOW in our judicial system that demands undeniable PROOF.

 

[PinktheFloyd88]

You made this topic like 2 weeks ago. A simple Google Search of "Hate Speech" would tell you what you need to know.

 

[MaryL]

Really? I am not

You made this topic like 2 weeks ago. A simple Google Search of "Hate Speech" would tell you what you need to know.

So? I bring it up again. How did such a random arbitrary and unsubstantiated issue become a touchstone of our legal system?

 

[PinktheFloyd88]

So? I bring it up again.

Just bump your old topic.

 

[MaryL]

Well, If you are critical and question my motives, my politics, you question my grammar and logic, THEN you can take the high road and call my posts "hate" and have my posts removed. Simply, that is how this works.

 

[MaryL]

You made this topic like 2 weeks ago. A simple Google Search of "Hate Speech" would tell you what you need to know.

How about you stick to the topic?

 

[PinktheFloyd88]

Okay, I answered it in your last topic - which had literally the exact same question word-for-word- but here you go again. From Google.com Took me 10 seconds.

Laws against hate speech can be divided into two types: those intended to preserve public order and those intended to protect human dignity. The laws designed to protect public order require that a higher threshold be violated, so they are not often enforced. For example, a 1992 study found that only one person was prosecuted in Northern Ireland in the preceding 21 years for violating a law against incitement to religious violence. The laws meant to protect human dignity have a much lower threshold for violation, so those in Canada, Denmark, France, Germany and the Netherlands tend to be more frequently enforced.[25]

 

[MaryL]

Okay, I answered it in your last topic - which had literally the exact same question word-for-word- but here you go again. From Google.com Took me 10 seconds.

Laws against hate speech can be divided into two types: those intended to preserve public order and those intended to protect human dignity. The laws designed to protect public order require that a higher threshold be violated, so they are not often enforced. For example, a 1992 study found that only one person was prosecuted in Northern Ireland in the preceding 21 years for violating a law against incitement to religious violence. The laws meant to protect human dignity have a much lower threshold for violation, so those in Canada, Denmark, France, Germany and the Netherlands tend to be more frequently enforced.[25]

I wonder what the great bard, George Carlin would say about "hate" as a actual legal category. Geo. Carlin's ghost: What's next: Ambivalence crimes? Mildly annoyed crimes? By what standards can you measure them? And God forbid. HOW did an unprovable emotional state become a standard in American Law?

 

[PinktheFloyd88]

I wonder what the great bard, George Carlin would say about "hate" as a actual legal category. Geo. Carlin's ghost: What's next: Ambivalence crimes? Mildly annoyed crimes? By what standards can you measure them?

Yeah well if the South would take racism seriously, "Hate Crimes" and getting the feds to step in would probably not be necessary.

Keep in mind: Ahmaud Arbery's murder was hidden and kept quiet by the Georgia police. It was not until the moron killers themselves POSTED the video of their murder online that anything was done.

 

[MaryL]

Yeah well if the South would take racism seriously, "Hate Crimes" and getting the feds to step in would probably not be necessary.

Keep in mind: Ahmaud Arbery's murder was hidden and kept quiet by the Georgia police. It was not until the moron killers themselves POSTED the video of their murder online that anything was done.

Really. Keep in mind that most whites, let alone blacks are murdered by blacks. Ok. All the hate and terror poor blacks do that are like 15% of the populace, they do 60% of crime. Lets ignore that. I Don't. I am perfectly aware of the high black crime rate.

 

[MaryL]

In America, blacks (15% of the population) are responsible for what, at least 50% of crimes. I know of instances where blacks attacked whites based on race and it was ignored by the media. The Jesse Smollett syndrome is endemic in the poor black community.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The entire problem with the notion of hate speech isn't with theory, but with application. If people actually operated according to a consistent working definition, that would be one thing, but considering they don't, it is simply a tool they use to further their agenda.

When people make accommodations on account the identity of those indulging in the speech and the identity of the target, they undermine the very notion of hate speech altogether.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I wonder what the great bard, George Carlin would say about "hate" as a actual legal category. Geo. Carlin's ghost: What's next: Ambivalence crimes? Mildly annoyed crimes? By what standards can you measure them? And God forbid. HOW did an unprovable emotional state become a standard in American Law?

He said "political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners".

 

[MaryL]

The concept of "hate" doesn't belong in American judicial system. It's not a substantial "thing" as a legal concept. It's not provable by any standard, an it seems to be more tool to persecute.

 

[MaryL]

Define "hate" in a strictly legal category. Define it. How is "IT" even a legitimate topic? Why not mildly annoyed or bored crimes? Isn't this silly? How does an unproven emotional state tie into the judicial system?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I have to wonder, HOW is "HATE" (whatever, speech or crime) even a valid standard in our judiciary system? Clearly it is subjective. It's astounding that it is allowed NOW in our judicial system that demands undeniable PROOF.

Rightwing hate speech is Constitutionally protected.

Conservatives are at liberty to express their racism, bigotry, and hate.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

Hate speech laws are just more authoritarian government overreach