Proposal: Hate Speech needs to be protected

[James R]

This thread has now been open for almost 3 weeks, and I don't see any debate being organised.

If there are no participants for the debate in two days time, this proposal will be considered dead.

 

[phlogistician]

This thread has now been open for almost 3 weeks, and I don't see any debate being organised.

If there are no participants for the debate in two days time, this proposal will be considered dead.

I agree, nobody pro seems is clear on what constitutes 'hate speech' so can hardly be in the position to defend something they cannot define.

 

[phlogistician]

Time out, everyone.

Stop with the rude/inflammatory posts, and stop debating the subject. This is not the place to be debating the topic. The proposal threads are supposed to establish the ground rules for the debate, if the debate ever occurs.

Un fucking believable. You delete my reply to this guy, but leave his post calling me an idiot. Outstanding moderation there bub.

I'm not debatng the subject btw, I'm trying to get the pro camp to decide what actually constitutes 'hate speech', as they seem to disagree with each other.

 

[Anarcho Union]

I agree, nobody pro seems is clear on what constitutes 'hate speech' so can hardly be in the position to defend something they cannot define.

Hate Speech constitutes as negative or demeaning expression towards a person, race, religion, ect. People on the pro side have shown what they define as hate speech, you just havent accepted any of them

 

[phlogistician]

Hate Speech constitutes as negative or demeaning expression towards a person, race, religion, ect. People on the pro side have shown what they define as hate speech, you just havent accepted any of them

Nobody has made a definitive statement of what constitutes hate speech.

You yourself said;

. Plus, what exactly is hate speech? "God I f*ckin' hate that show." Hate speech can be extended to anything. If we begin restrections on certain hate speech against certan groups, that allows for the extenstion to hate speech against lets say... the government.

You yourself were not sure, until pressed.

 

[James R]

I'm trying to get the pro camp to decide what actually constitutes 'hate speech', as they seem to disagree with each other.

That could be hashed out in the debate.

 

[S.A.M.]

It would be interesting to know what the qualifiers are for protection.

What determines any speech needs to be protected? Why?

 

[Anarcho Union]

It would be interesting to know what the qualifiers are for protection.

What determines any speech needs to be protected? Why?

The fact that we can feely speak on, lets say simply sites like this without being arrested or somehow just disapear for asking questions about our government, laws, or enforcment shows that speech must always be protected. Freedom of expression must always be limitless, otherwise we are stuck in a world that the present and past is written by the courpted hierarchys

 

[James R]

No takers for this debate. Thread closed.