Sharks and love

Is it ethical to censor hate speech? Why (or why not) is it the right thing to do?

What are the appropriate, fair parameters to censor such speech?

(BTW this is my mind wandering - not a homework assignment )

Rosi

I think it's alright to censor "hate speech". What qualifies as hate speech is another thing altogether.

I don't think it's a good idea to go around saying bad things about people, or trying to incite violence, etc. Usually only people with hidden agendas go around maligning others. As to the freedom of speech aspect of it, with freedom comes responsibility. If you can't be bothered to be responsible, then I'm afraid freedom is too noble an idea for you insofar as it could have grave consequences for others, which "hate speech" at certain levels (depending on who the horse is) does.

Besides, there's something called decency. And I'm a huge fan of it.

darlingchatterbox

"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." -Soren Kierkegaard

---------------------------------

I have been accused of hate speech and have definitely had my go-a-rounds with people disliking my comments. However, I'm not crude, nor do I wish harm upon anyone. The comments that have caused reactions in people have all been Truth, though not the most pleasant they were True none the less. So in my personal experience, to censor "hate speech" is to censor Truths that don't come candy-coated. This would not be a very good idea, unless of course, you are trying to create the sort of world that denies Truth and venerates lies for simple pleasures.

On the other hand, it would also depend on what is defined as "hate speech".

The English language is vast - if you want to insult someone surely you could find a more intelligent way of doing so, rather than resort to slave-class antics. So anything with vulgar words and/or name calling I wouldn't consider "hate speech" so much as I would consider it just plain moronic and fit for those in the lower classes of society. Should it be censored? I think that is a personal choice. If you choose to surround yourself around people of a slave-class mentality then you deserve to hear whatever they are saying given you chose it for yourself. I, however, try to avoid those sorts of people and therefore have no need to censor them since I'm not around to hear what they say.

-----------------------------------------
"How much time he saves who does not look to see what his neighbor says or does or things." -Marcus Aurelius

mlipo

[quote=darlingchatterbox;45278
I have been accused of hate speech and have definitely had my go-a-rounds with people disliking my comments. However, I'm not crude, nor do I wish harm upon anyone. The comments that have caused reactions in people have all been Truth, though not the most pleasant they were True none the less. So in my personal experience, to censor "hate speech" is to censor Truths that don't come candy-coated. This would not be a very good idea, unless of course, you are trying to create the sort of world that denies Truth and venerates lies for simple pleasures.

[/quote]

I'm extremely interested in which Truths caused people to accuse you of hate speech.

laura

agreed.

the problem is my chatterboxdarling that there are really very few 'truths' as such. to be sure 2+3=5 and all that but, and here's the problem, outside of maths, most things are rather interpretative.

laura

its alright sharks, we don't mind helping with your assignment!

i think that when you assume that it is ethical to censor anything, you are assuming that the listener is somehow vulnerable to possible deception. the question is then a matter of obligation to protect the vulnerable and to what extent you should go to do this. this makes for a far more complex set of questions because, obviously, there are vulnerable elements in all societies that (i think) government does ave an obligation to protect.

darlingchatterbox

A simple example would be, "Equality is a myth."

This isn't the most pleasant of Truths in a society that demands we all be equal, but that doesn't make it hateful.

darlingchatterbox

I agree with you.

Not every situation of censor ship is necessarily bad. The most apparent example that comes to mind would be a parent control what their child is exposed to. In this case I think it is justified and should be encouraged so long as it is done to protect the child's innocence and within moderation.

However, the line between protecting a child's innocence and enabling the child to live in stupidity is, in most cases, crystal clear. Where as, the place to draw the line with "hate speech" isn't as well defined because it requires a personal interpretation. Who gets to decide which interpretation is correct, who gets the power to say what someone else's word mean? This is what leads to problems in censoring speech.

-----------------------------
Still, I don't understand why people would want to politically enforce censorship of hate-speech, it isn't necessary. In fact, the solution is quite simple as I stated before -if you don't like what someone is saying then go away from them, if you can't get away then don't let them get to you, simply ignore them.

Pedro

Lucius' signature is relevant to all sides of these two topics.

raconteur

Dear Sharks and Love;

Homework assignment or not, check out http://www.answers.com/topic/hate-speech.

They have a concise review of the US Supreme Court perspective as well as some comparison with the laws of other nations.