Free Speech: The Consequences Of Hate Speech

1386 Words6 Pages
Flames, tear gas, riots, city blocks destroyed; all consequences of a single statement. In today's modern society, acts of derogatory communication, known as hate speech, have become a controversial topic in America. Although hate speech is awful, it should be protected by the first amendment. Hate speech should continue being permitted because omitting such phrases would set a precedent for censorship, and oppress the minority. Such censorship would lead to a totalitarian rule by the majority. While hate speech should be better defined, bigoted acts should not be included in hate speech or harmful subjective phrases. Hate speech has become a spotlight topic and there is a debate if free speech should protect it. The main opposition against…show more content…
This is an example of the correlation hate speech has with being led into acts of violence. Another argument against hate speech is that it is cancerous in nature, and will spread. Solveig Horne, the Minister of Children and Equality in Norway states, Throughout the internet, hate speech is being spread, causing widespread bullying of minorities - such as LGBTQ+ kids. This shows that free speech is the singular buffer for the hate speech to spread. Free speech is important to keep to protect the minority from the majority. This is because, without free speech, beliefs that go against the status quo could be seen as unreasonable. Jay Stanley, the Senior Policy Analyst at ACLU, says, This is seen in the 1960s with civil rights ending segregation, and without free speech, these ideas would have been seen as a disgrace and quickly shunned. This shows how in the past free speech helped people with major civil rights cases. The other point is that by censoring free speech, it won't stop hate speech at all and people will find other ways to spread the speech. Becca DiPietro, editor for the…show more content…
The overarching idea of the internet and hate speech is that it will spread if not censored and it will give a false idea that speech that is hateful is ok. Sean McElwee, Writer and researcher for the Huffington Post, said that “...the freedom of the press should be governed by a very strict prohibition of all and every anonymity.” However, with the Internet, the public dialogue has moved online, where hate speech is easy and anonymous. This leads to the thought of the hate speech spreading to them bullying others with these hateful ideas. A study by Karen Kaplan a writer for the Los Angeles Times found that Kids that are bullied or physically abused have a 60% higher rate to develop mental health issues. The direct link between bullying and mental health is increasingly real and it will continue without the censorship of hate speech on the internet. But the reality, there are better ways to stop hate speech without removing free speech. The main argument for this is to instead of repressing peoples ideas, let them be heard and have the public decide if the ideas are good or not for themselves. Marcus Schulzke a lecturer at the University of York says ”The social benefits of protecting hate speech become clear when one considers how the use of hate speech exposes those with hateful beliefs to public evaluation”. This shows how the people are the

More about Free Speech: The Consequences Of Hate Speech

Open Document