Does the First Amendment Protect Hate Speech?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ม.ค. 2025

ความคิดเห็น • 102

  • @rogerwelsh2335
    @rogerwelsh2335 2 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    Free speech should always be defended. It is an absolute necessity for freedom.

  • @United_States_Of_America_1776
    @United_States_Of_America_1776 5 ปีที่แล้ว +18

    Yes. Yes it does.

  • @thucydides7849
    @thucydides7849 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    57:59 he doesn’t realize it, but this point actually hurts his case. In the same way that Facebook wrongly saw his picture as pornographic, they would likewise see many instances of hate speech which aren’t actually hate speech.

  • @theundead1600
    @theundead1600 5 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    Dangerous liberty is better then safe slavery.

    • @brentjames6927
      @brentjames6927 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Facebook can't sensor people with opinion I am because I'm Black

  • @jennifermarrs754
    @jennifermarrs754 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Excellent debate!!! Thank you for doing this.

  • @hafsalinda
    @hafsalinda 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Lets quote the full section from the court case, as the speaker left out the most important part,
    dealing with official opinion
    If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion,
    or
    *other matters of opinion,*
    Or
    force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.
    If there are any circumstances which permit an exception, they do not now occur to us.[n19]
    19 military service
    Or other matters of opinion is important enough to include in the quoted section.

  • @agreetodisagree4751
    @agreetodisagree4751 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Crazy that there are so few views of this very important and enlightening debate. Shannon's linking of the 14th Ammendment to the 1st made a very compelling argument. But in the end, I can see that the 1st Ammendment must prevail everywhere and in all cases. There exist laws to protect people from imminent danger. A group of men taunting a woman walking by are innocent until the stalking or physical assault begins, ie., acting on the speech. People need not be arrested for their lewd thoughts and words. Likewise, laws are in place to give recourse for job discrimination, sexual harrassment, etc. And how did these laws come about except by both sides being heard. Any person can find a subgroup that they belong to. I happen to have a very large nose and I am marginalized very frequently; however, I am happy to know immediately what quality of person I am dealing with. I have a gay friend who was holding a rally for BLM, yet when people came around yelling that ALL lives matter, he was outraged and called them fascists.

    • @Dr_JSH
      @Dr_JSH 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Pushing back against white people insisting "All Lives Matter" is fine. Even necessary.
      What we have is a power differential. To the powerful, equity feels like oppression. "Black Lives Matter" does not mean white lives don't matter, but that's how white people who've convinced themselves that they and the nation they founded are being replaced see it.
      This is an old, dirty trick of the intolerant. They appropriate "outsiders'" rallying calls to render those groups silent or too divisive to succeed.
      The focus shifted from the obvious double standard of the criminal justice system to Republicans squawking about the nebulous #CRT and claims that white schoolchildren were being told to hate themselves because of the color of their skin. All this from resenting the slogan "Black Lives Matter."
      The same happens with gays. Every June #TheReligiousWhite gripe about Gay Pride Month. The reality that gays and their allies have clawed out sufficient power to be recognized as African Americans, Asians et al. are drives them nuts because they realize they are losing the right to take away gays' rights. Inevitably, "Straight Pride" parades get held, as if heteros need an opportunity to come together and enjoy the diversity heteros represent in US society.

  • @MrSmith-jj9te
    @MrSmith-jj9te 5 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    Yes, the 1st amendment does protect hate speech because the whole purpose of the constitution and the first 10 amendments, is too protect OUR NATURAL RIGHTS that all men receive the moment they’re born into this world!
    These are natural rights, not government given privileges.
    Rights being turned into government given privileges, are the very thing that the constitution’s against.
    People, the whole purpose of the constitution, is to limit the governments control.
    The first 10 rights listed on the constitution, are natural rights that are bestowed upon us by god and these rights, are above any form of government.
    A government that goes against the constitution, is no longer a government of the people, but an enemy to the people.
    The government, is not our creator, it cannot take what it don’t own and didn’t give.
    Freedom, is a two way street and people, are allowed to hate whatever the hell they want to hate, free from government persecution.
    Libenazi’s are a diseased group of childish people that only want freedom and equality when it’s on their side of the street.
    Our government, is the country’s own greatest enemy.
    We have failed to uphold and defend our natural rights, in the face of a government that started to believe in it’s own make believe to control and pimp things it does not own.
    A government with a god complex, is a very very dangerous thing, for society and country living under it.
    America, is letting its newfound euro-social stupidity, pimp the nation into a society of brothelized socialism whores.
    When a free country tries to enslave itself by sucking off socialism, it’s obvious that the government and public, are both drowning under a river of their own stupidity.

  • @thedankatheist3466
    @thedankatheist3466 3 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    The constitution mentions freedom of speech. There is no if ands or buts in there. No modifiers no nothing. Just speech. To make exceptions is fundamentally unconstitutional.

    • @eyesofibad2461
      @eyesofibad2461 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Supported

    • @anthonyarkadia9760
      @anthonyarkadia9760 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      That's the problem, the constitution is written very simple..
      And anyone whom tried to silver tongue it knows that they are wrong.-!

    • @thedankatheist3466
      @thedankatheist3466 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@anthonyarkadia9760 how self righteous of you. It is very simple. Say whatever the fuck you want. Unless you are actively harming someone or people it’s legal.

    • @xx-er7se
      @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Constitutions and laws evolve just like humans. We shouldn't blindly obey laws without questioning them just because they're 'official'

    • @tammyl.9254
      @tammyl.9254 ปีที่แล้ว

      What if I wanted to call a black man a n*gg*r

  • @sayhitosteve2785
    @sayhitosteve2785 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    England didn't like Patrick Henry's "hate" speech against them. The current US govt. doesn't like the "hate" speech against them either.

  • @xx-er7se
    @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Both these guys made really good points

  • @jkonior1
    @jkonior1 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Great debate! I'm still firmly on David French's side, but Shannon Gilreath did in fact help me to understand the other side better.

    • @seal869
      @seal869 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      I honestly can’t say the same. When he led off with “there is a right to free speech but there is also a right to be free from speech that dehumanizes…” he pretty much lost me. The whole issue is that those two “rights” aren’t really compatible, and we’ve chosen which we will prioritize.

    • @xx-er7se
      @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Really good debate, I literally agreed with most points on both sides.. such a tricky subject.

  • @larrymick7287
    @larrymick7287 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Freedom of speech is the bed rock for a nation to remain free. Your opinions may seem extreme and offend me---and then again my opinions may seem extreme and offend you. Call it hate speech if you wish. That's what a free nation of citizens is all about. Politically correct or government limited speech is not free speech. The younger man on this panel does not seem to have a rational perspective---as I listen, his arguments become more and more in line with the victimhood mentally which has become prolific in America. I firmly believe in free will, advancement based on merit, and equal opportunity---not equal outcome. The greatest threat to the black race comes from within the black community and those who claim to be the voice of their community.As a paying spectator at a football game, you can take a knee, but remember if you do, I can take a pass on purchasing tickets. I don't go to a football game to be subjected to a misdirected and ill mannered and rude political expression----I go to watch football and nothing else.

    • @brentjames6927
      @brentjames6927 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      You can't go against Trump supporters you'll be blocked o. A witness as s black Man on social media net neutrality

  • @williekellerwhitaker1531
    @williekellerwhitaker1531 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Thanks

  • @notthefather3919
    @notthefather3919 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    It does. Next question.

    • @xx-er7se
      @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Deep thinker here

    • @billbillerton6122
      @billbillerton6122 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@xx-er7se No deep thought required. The answer is and always has been yes.

    • @Sxlientz
      @Sxlientz ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Agree

  • @stevenwendellnelson5228
    @stevenwendellnelson5228 27 วันที่ผ่านมา

    🙏🙏🙏Religious freedom was about encouraging the worship of the one and only GOD by not favoring one religion over another, it was not about encouraging the worship of any idol. And freedom of speech, the freedom to assemble, etc, the founders had something kind of noble in mind. 🙏🙏🙏

  • @klein2042
    @klein2042 4 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    It protects ALL SPEECH. ALL OF IT. WHAT IS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?

    • @thedankatheist3466
      @thedankatheist3466 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      A frightening amount of things aparently

    • @timewarpdrive77
      @timewarpdrive77 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@thedankatheist3466 Whats frightening about allowing everyone to speak on an even playing field?

    • @thedankatheist3466
      @thedankatheist3466 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@timewarpdrive77 I mean there’s a frightening amount of things people don’t understand about the constitution. That being one of them

    • @anthonyarkadia9760
      @anthonyarkadia9760 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      People who DON'T like FREE speech-...
      Like the debater said..your affecting their control of trying to gain power!

    • @xx-er7se
      @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Life isn't that simple. Life is hard to understand if you can think a bit deeper and see more than black and white. Speech is also telling someone to kill someone else for example. Both guys make good points.

  • @victorbergman9169
    @victorbergman9169 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Yes

  • @righteousbyfaithinChrist
    @righteousbyfaithinChrist 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I do not believe defamation of character to be protected.

  • @suarezguy
    @suarezguy 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Shannon seemed to really continually ignore David's points that censorship is much more often used by the powerful for the status quo, against increasing equality and against speech that is just disliked, and to pretty much ignore that anti-gay vitriol correlated with overall increasingly pro-gay views and policies.

    • @suarezguy
      @suarezguy 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      And that suppressing free speech does not, cannot just end intolerant views, it just channels them to intolerant and extreme actions.

  • @thomasdwyer1690
    @thomasdwyer1690 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    It's the whole point of the first amendment actually. Popular speech doesn't need protection, no one will throw you in jail or kill you for saying soemthing popular.
    It's only unpopular or hateful speech that will get you in trouble, and thus only unpopular and hateful speech that needs to be protected.
    Bottom line, if you think hate speech should be criminalized, you are anti first amendment and anti free speech.

  • @doolittlegeorge
    @doolittlegeorge 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Does the Constitution or any other law label *"speech"* as of any type? Either way the 1st Amendment is about *FAR* more than just some choice words *AS RELATES TO AUTHORITY IN THEIR EMPLOY* although certainly there is that ("failure of the MBS product is a matter of free speech!")

  • @cobybryson6668
    @cobybryson6668 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    WHAT QUALIFIES AS HATE SPEECH ?

  • @Lmr6973
    @Lmr6973 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    21:25 Must be understood "properly". Here is the problem. If you don't don't see the issue at hand the way I do and are in agreement with me then you don't understand. If you are not capable of understanding the issue what possibly could you offer anything related to it.
    Without free speach you are not free.

    • @xx-er7se
      @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Complete freedom is an illusion. I'm not pro censorship but are you gonna defend death threats or death orders for example? I feel like I agree with both these guys..

    • @Lmr6973
      @Lmr6973 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@xx-er7se I've been threatened with death more than once and I'm sure most people have been at some point in their life. I don't quite understand what you mean by death orde but it is already illegal to scream fire in a building full of people. You are correct no one has absolute freedom buy GOD if you believe therebis a GOD.

    • @xx-er7se
      @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@Lmr6973 I'd be surprised if most people had been threatened with death. Unless they live in Afghanistan or somewhere dangerous or full of cpnflict. I'm sorry you have. So there are.limits to what we can utter. I don't believe in god since I was young. A good god wouldn't stand by and watch people get slaughtered right? But that's another topic..

  • @hanj31
    @hanj31 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    of course it does. only thing it doesn't protect is something that directly calls for violence or false action like yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theatre when there is no fire.

  • @greglewis3903
    @greglewis3903 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Here we have a hour and a half discussion on whether the freedom of expression is absolute. The answer, the easy answer, of course, if you're not a leftist, is that yes, freedom of speech is absolute. You don't have the right to be unoffended. If what I say offends you, then that's too bad for you.

    • @billbillerton6122
      @billbillerton6122 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Bingo! We have a winner. This whole debate is pointless because the answer is yes.

  • @mr.pickle6744
    @mr.pickle6744 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    90% seems a little out of balance to start🤔.

  • @Curtis5241
    @Curtis5241 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Yeah i have a honor code to protect my comments and remarks and statements and opinions and expressions

  • @ThePROFESS10NAL
    @ThePROFESS10NAL 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Interesting Shannon (spelling?) cites FBI statistics but doesn’t see the pattern on table 43. To him I presume, facts are racist.

  • @Lone432345
    @Lone432345 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    1:30:00 Equality is a noble goal. But its also an intangible one. Some people are going have some advantages over others. Throwing people in prison because there views isn't going to change that.

    • @spartanqs117
      @spartanqs117 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Their

    • @garyhall5397
      @garyhall5397 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@spartanqs117 The "their" in question identifies as "there".

  • @anthonyarkadia9760
    @anthonyarkadia9760 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    That little millennial up there is a perfect example of what's happening in America, they want to take your FREE speach away, tell you how to think, and feel, and if you disagree with any of their rhetoric, then your this, or that..
    People don't need others to tell them what is right, or wrong, they can make that decision for themselves, whether it is right, or rong..
    #FREEDOM OF SPEECH

  • @cyrusblackwood33
    @cyrusblackwood33 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Hate speech doesn't exist.

    • @anthonyarkadia9760
      @anthonyarkadia9760 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      It sure does, anyone who doesn't appreciate your opinion, then it's hate speech!

    • @cyrusblackwood33
      @cyrusblackwood33 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@anthonyarkadia9760you got me there

  • @javierruiz1710
    @javierruiz1710 5 ปีที่แล้ว

    yes

  • @Robert-nu4vc
    @Robert-nu4vc 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    There is no such thing as hate speech. Free speech means all speech. Don't like it? Too fucking bad.

  • @jessicastrat9376
    @jessicastrat9376 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    I’m an atheist, and can’t agree with the theist on the left more.

  • @anthonyarkadia9760
    @anthonyarkadia9760 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    36.15 somes it up very simple..

  • @onesmoothstone5680
    @onesmoothstone5680 7 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Who invited the shemale? The shemale is arguing emotions, the other guy is arguing law. Emotions have no place within law.

    • @saturnz7sonz813
      @saturnz7sonz813 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      One Smooth Stone - "FAAAAGGOT!!!!!!!"
      1ST AMENDMENT🇺🇸✊😁

    • @xx-er7se
      @xx-er7se 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Humans are emotional animals so laws that govern us are inextricably linked to emotion right? We're not robots

  • @matilda5823
    @matilda5823 ปีที่แล้ว

    Harlem Crow - Clarence Thomas's boyfriend (sugar daddy)

  • @shawnnbramwell8773
    @shawnnbramwell8773 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    This kid can spew out rhetoric ( i.e. 1:41:25), like a kid playing "eruption" solo on guitar note for note; along with 100 other songs/solos, but can't improv blues in any key.

  • @hafsalinda
    @hafsalinda 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    God gives rights to his creation [ you control what you create operates here]
    govrrnments hi jack gods rights and detetmine the scope and restriction on these mutable privledges they offer the " citizen " the seek to control.
    What has government created that they can controll?
    Nothing that god hasnt created first?
    God is first in line, first in time.
    Imlo.

  • @hcwcars1
    @hcwcars1 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    Does the First Amendment Protect Hate Speech?
    What a silly question

    • @saturnz7sonz813
      @saturnz7sonz813 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Maria Schick - Agreed. But why does this still happen -
      th-cam.com/video/oa68iECIVso/w-d-xo.html,
      th-cam.com/video/DuehRf8hmXI/w-d-xo.html

    • @brentjames6927
      @brentjames6927 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Not according to Facebook community standards bs I'm blocked one month because I would not surrender my free speech rights to Trump supporters so Zuckerberg blocked me five times this year I feel violated because I'm Black

  • @suarezguy
    @suarezguy 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Banning burning of the Quran would very much be in line with Shannon's philosophy as Muslims are in the US very much a historically marginalized minority group without power and burning a Quran, from the idea that Muslims are violent, can increase discrimination and violence against them, but he think that's not about anti-equality speech apparently as they're a minority group he has little interest in or sympathy to or he doesn't think the link to discrimination, disenfranchisement is direct enough or he just feels it would still be going too far for the government to make their religious book sacrosanct.

    • @suarezguy
      @suarezguy 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      He doesn't even admit the inconsistency and tension, being asked about burning the Quran and he does say that should be allowed but because if the Bible is burned most people are Christian and in power.

    • @sher1864
      @sher1864 ปีที่แล้ว

      Murdering people is not ok no matter. That's why most Religions in America don't go into the military. Govt fooled many by fear. People/citizens just need to actually study history and not just listen to news.

  • @Trid3nt861
    @Trid3nt861 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Leftist, SJW's,Marxists, Democrats,Liberals,Progressives,etc: "We want to criminalize free speech as its hate speech"
    Skeptic: "So you want big government and a tyrant to put guns against your heads and have you executed or thrown in concentration camps or made to disappear, you want that type of censorship, you do know that you will be on the chopping block too under that utopia.... Don't think for a second that you will be excluded from it. Do you want your speech to be censored?"
    Leftist,SJW's,Marxists,Democrats,Liberals,Progressives,etc: "Umm........ *brain melts* "

    • @anthonyarkadia9760
      @anthonyarkadia9760 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Hitler, Stealing, Castro, just to name a few, what did they do first?
      They took your guns!
      What did they do second?
      They took your speech...
      Americans better wake up because this is what is trying to take place in America!

  • @nas0ng
    @nas0ng 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Yes