Free Speech and Hate Speech
Free speech is considered as the freedom of communication for the people. It includes the liberty of the press and the people to say what they want/like and liberty for the people to assemble like protesting peacefully. Also, freedom of speech gives people the opportunity to articulate their feelings and thoughts without worrying about any punishment or government censorship. Moreover, hate speech is where a group of individual or a person is being attacked based on several factors like disability, religion, sexual orientation, race or gender. Furthermore, according to the constitution and under the First Amendment, both free speech and hate speech are protected in courts. Therefore the text will discuss whether or not the “hate groups” should be given similar free speech rights as others.
The Argument for Hate Speech as Free Speech
Hate speech is considered as free speech because the court and the law protect it. Hence the hate groups should be given rights to free speech as others because of several reasons. First, hate speech has a legal block on its defense (Winfried). Secondly, the principle of freedom of speech still stands by law where they have the right to hate any particular group. Thirdly, hate group should be given the same power of free speech as others because no one can regulate a person mind. It is because all individual has their right to act, think and even crackdown on actions. Also, all individual be it hate groups have the rights to express their message such as disagreements, and no one has the right to stop/silence them (Winfried). Fourthly, hate speech is like any other kind of statement. Hence it should be considered as free speech. It is because if a person does not like what the other person is saying, he or she should ignore. Even, it will remain their right to free speech and will not change once feelings.
The Counterarguments against Hate Speech as Free Speech
Fifthly, the hate group should be given the right to prevent the government from having the full power of deciding which of the speeches or opinion are hateful. It is because the ability gives the states the opportunity to prosecute the minorities instead of protecting them (Winfried). Also, the hate group needs the same right because if the hate speech is banned, one will be taking the hate group freedom of speech and it will indicate a violation of the hate group First amendment rights. Hence no matter how peaceful or hateful the rhetoric of the hate group, it is still their right to say or express what they feel. Finally, no matter how hate speech may be ignorant, it should be protected as the free speech (Winfried). When the hate group gives out a hate speech, it will be up to for the hearers to counter the ignorance or to ignore.
The Dangerous Nature of Hate Speech by Hate Groups
Moreover, hate speech by hate group is viewed to be very dangerous. It is because the words spoken by the hate groups are compelling and they can influence other people to act in a violent manner (Abigail). Secondly, the hate group should not be given the rights of free speech like others because their hate speeches are seen as the public countenance of discrimination against the vulnerable group of people, and it is also counter-productive. Also, nations that do not punish the hate group for hate speeches are states that invite violence and tolerate discrimination among the minorities. Thirdly, the hate gangs should not be given the right to free speech because their hate speeches act as the destruction of the victims and the society (Abigail).
The Negative Impact of Hate Speech
Moreover, hate speech will limit the opportunities of people, push the people to poverty, socially isolate them, endanger the people's safety and health and also make the people enter into depression and loss self-esteem (Kevin). Fourthly, hate speech by the hate gangs usually looks like a threat to the intended group. It is because it makes others feel afraid and unwelcome. Finally, hate speech acts as the ability of the hate group to radicalize other people (Kevin). For example, when the KKK hate group took a firm hold in the aftermath of Civil War, leading to a massive campaign against the black people and their white partners which led to the loss of many lives.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there are a variety of arguments against and for hate speech by the hate groups. The hate group should be given the freedom of speech because they are human beings and have the right to speak their mind and express what they feel. It is because it will lead the nation to act according to the principle of the First Amendment and not violate the law. Moreover, it has its effects on the victims and the society at large, even though the law protects it. It has a negative impact on the victims since it brings about fear and infringes other people’s ability to pursue happiness, liberty, and life. Hence, the hate group can be given the freedom of speech, but the state should ensure to enforce the law of punishment to the hate group in case their hate speeches leads to violence or destruction of properties.
Work Cited
Brugger, Winfried. “Ban On or Protection of Hate Speech? Some Observations Based on German and American Law”, 17 Tulane European & Civil Law Forum, 1 (2002)
Boyle, Kevin, “Hate Speech: The United States versus the Rest of the World?” Maine Law Review, 2001.
Levin, Abigail. The Cost of Free Speech: Pornography, Hate Speech, and their Challenge to Liberalism, Niagara University, New York, 2010.
