Persuasive Essay On Hate Speech

keep a close eye on racial Issues. Even though our way of punishing people for these crimes are ineffective and very unfair. Most laws are written to determine whether the person intentionally selected their victim or if it was a random act. The hate crime laws in California's, for example, says that any crime retaining to a certain race or even religious group, will ultimately call for harsher punishment to the criminal. There have even been a few times were people want to include violence against police a hate crime. (McLaughlin, 2017) Criminals who commit hate crimes target their victims, whether randomly or planned out. A few years ago, in Charleston SC, there was a young white male believed to be in some sort of white supremist group, walked into a predominantly black church and randomly opened fire before leaving. Police found the man and brought him into custody, a few weeks later he was sentenced to a few months in prison and is now on with his life. So, for discouraging racial influence on people would clearly have to start at an earlier age, to prevent further hate crimes would mean that we would need to teach young children the dangers of committing racially charged crimes. In New York, multiple bomb threats were called into Jewish communities, and group of lawmakers in that state pushed to secure more help to those victims of hate crimes. The hate crime legislation, recently passed by the democratic party, made an offense that if you were making graffiti, then it

Even though hate speech can be damaging to the targeted victims, it still cannot be set to a standard or principle because it is hard to define what is and is not hate speech. Hate speech is so wide-ranging and vast, no limit can be set to regulate it. What some groups may consider to be hateful and demeaning, others groups deem to be their founding principles and beliefs. A study taken place at University of Colorado quotes, "Often, when hate speech prohibitions are in place, people engaged in serious intergroup conflicts simply refuse to talk at all, preventing constructive problem solving and allowing tensions to build." American Civil Liberties Union suggests the best way to counterattack hate speech is to not censor it, but to respond with more moral speech. ACLU goes by the principles that the rights of free speech are indivisible:

The first amendment, the right of freedom of speech is one of the most important classic fantasy to almost anyone living in the United States, building the foundation of our nation. This right gives us plenty of different opportunities to express our opinions and political viewpoints on any issues in America. But it comes with a price, people have been protesting multiple different events trying to prevent people from expressing opposing opinions or political viewpoints on that has issues in America. For the minority of people, expressing a different opinion should be protected no matter how controversial or insensitive it may be.

Since the election of Donald Trump, the country seems to be in a state of division. Protests against the president’s executive orders and movements like Black Lives Matter has caused many hate groups to make a reappearance into the main-stream media. White supremacist, white nationalists, and alt-right leaders are speaking their minds about the perceived discrimination against whites. These types of white advocacy groups have gone through an evolution since the times of the Ku Klux Klan and have created new techniques for recruiting members. These units can be a type of love/hate relationship, and once people have joined, they find it very difficult to leave. But hate can be overcome; through education, tolerance training, and even counter-protesting. Because of feelings of discontent, fear in the loss of white power, and a lack of experience with groups outside of their race, America is seeing a dangerous and unfortunate rise in these types of hate groups.

How much we value the right of free speech is put to its severest test when the speaker is someone we disagree with most. Speech that deeply offends our morality or is hostile to our way of life warrants the same constitutional protection as other speech because the right of free speech is indivisible. However, in recent years, the right to free speech is one of legal and moral ambiguity-What separates offensive free speech from dangerous or threatening (and presumably illegal) hate speech? Under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, every American citizen should be entitled to the right of free expression, thought, and speech. While free speech, including racial, sexist, or otherwise prejudiced remarks, must protected no matter

Freedom of speech has been a controversial issue throughout the world. Our ability to say whatever we want is very important to us as individuals and communities. Although freedom of speech and expression may sometimes be offensive to other people, it is still everyone’s right to express his/her opinion under the American constitution which states that “congress shall make no law

As hate crimes have risen in number during the past five years; many state governments have attempted to prevent such crimes by passing laws called bias laws. These laws make a crime that is motivated by hatred based on the victim’s race, religion, ethnic background, or sexual orientation a more serious crime than such an act would ordinarily be. Many people believe that these laws violate the criminal’s freedom of speech. Many hate group members say that freedom of speech is the right to say or write or publish one’s thoughts, or to express one’s self, they also say that this right is guaranteed to all Americans. But people and organizations who are against these hate groups ask themselves if the first amendment include and protect all form of expression, even those that ugly or hurtful like the burning crosses. The Supreme Court Justices have decided that some kinds of speech are not protected by the Constitution,

The idea of hate speech has been something that courts can’t seem to find a middle ground about; however, recent strides have brought us closer to eradicating this action. The first major supreme court case regarding hate speech occurred in 1992 in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul. R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul involved a young, white male burning a cross on a black family’s front lawn. The supreme court ruled that this action was part of the boy’s free speech guaranteed in the first amendment. People often overlook the fact that the boy could have been held responsible for damaging the family’s property. Another case occurred in 1993 in Wisconsin v. Mitchell, where Mitchell and a group of black men were outside a theater which showed a racially insensitive

¨A hate crimes in any crime committed which is motivated by bias or based on the victim’s perceived membership in a specific group.¨(“Hate Crimes”). Hate crimes are the outcome when someone targets a victim based on their race, sexual orientation, religion, and etc… The question that should be asked is why people support it. Hate crimes are inhumane. Even the constitution states that all men are created equal, so what steps have we taken to stop hate crimes and how do we show everyone why it’s wrong. “The FBI investigated what are now called hate crimes

Will you able to function if you lived in another race’s shoes? Will you be able to function and deal with consequences of being the other race?When we were all fetuses in our mom’s tummy we as humans are not given the options to chose our race. Yet we are still being ridiculed from what we are born with. Racism is one of many elements that in the United States of America affects our society. However, there is a hidden problem that promotes racism. It is the fact that a lot of people try to make themselves believe that racism doesn 't exist. But unfortunately, it still does. Everyone knows about the problem of racism but don 't realize that they are supporting the problem by discriminating against other people 's rights but at the same

According to The First Amendment of The U.S Constitution, it allows citizens to have freedom of speech, press, religion and assembly & petition. The First Amendment protects speech no matter how offensive its content. The Supreme Court has said that there is no ‘hate speech’ exception to the First Amendment. For example, if a white student confronts a black student on campus and starts shouting racial slurs in a one-on-one confrontation, that student may be subject to discipline. Instead, the First Amendment requires the government to protect all speakers, no matter how provocative their speech might be. This connects to hate groups being allowed in the U.S, because why should freedom of speech be allowed but hate groups shouldn’t? ‘hate speech’ can provoke someone to get violent.

In the name of free speech, hate speech should not be tolerated. Hate speech has devastating effects on the people and communities it is targeted at. Left unchecked hate speech can lead to harmful and violent effects. Over the past few years, the effects of hate speech used on women, homosexuals, ethnic groups and religious minorities have become more and more apparent. Hate speech can be very divisive in many of the situations it is used, depending on who interprets the expression can vary how people react, due to hate speech, not being easy defend when it does not hurt that certain person or community. If left uncheck hate speech can develop into harmful narratives that remain. While hate speech is not against the law, some have begun

Like most democratic nations in the world, the United States has had its own fair share of issues with hate speech. There has been a lot of controversy over whether hate speech should be regulated. In analyzing the concept of free speech, one cannot ignore that it does not occur in a vacuum. There have been all types of debasements ranging from ethnic, religious, racial and gendered stereotyping. Freedom of speech inherently includes all other fundamental human rights. Hence, as acknowledged through natural rights, other rights and personhood should adamantly be included within this scope of this protection. Hate speech is a limit on free speech, as it not only puts the victim under deliberate psychological and physical harm, but also

Hate speech; is this the type of speech that the First Amendment protects? Should this type of speech be defended? If this type of speech is censored on college campuses, have the students lost their right to the First Amendment? What kind of damage does hate speech cause physical and emotional? Who does hate speech affect?

Threats to national security and threats to individuals or groups, in my opinion is speech that should not be protected by the First Amendment. National security is the first line of defense for America, its’ the agency’s job to act against terrorism international as well as domestic. Threats have the potential to cause thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of preventable casualties. The September 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon is sad example.