Used Hate Speech example essay topic

A Question of Justice While a clear and concise definition remains forthcoming, it is easier to establish what hate speech is not. Hate speech is wrong but legal in the United States of America mostly because we have the freedom of speech. But the First Amendment exists precisely to protect the most offensive and controversial speech from government suppression. In this case, people are allowed to use hate speech and not get arrested or any legal actions against them. The best way to counter obnoxious speech such as this is with more speech. Persuasion, not violence, is the solution to this problem (Jou hari).

Hate speech has been mistakenly tied with other categories of speech both legal and illegal. One should avoid confusing hate speech with something it is not because other legal implications might come into play. Hate speech is not obscene speech. According to the guidelines of the Federal Communications Committee (FCC) for indecent speech, which define indecent speech as, 'limited to language or material that depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as much by the contemporary community standards for the broadcast means, sexual activities or organs,' then hate speech is not indecent speech either (Pullma).

Indecent speech should also be kept apart from the category of hate speech, which involves victimization. Hate speech is offensive language towards a particular group, race, gender, or religion. These include the insulting words by which their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality (Pullma). There is no choice but to continue tolerating intolerance, until the Constitution itself would be amended, which is an event unlikely to occur. In the meantime, individual cases and court opinions add more problems to the already growing problem called the constitutionality of hate speech.

Hate speech on the Internet is one of those problems, unique, but part of the whole picture. I am against hate speech, but all people no matter their beliefs are entitled to freedom of speech like the next person, but this does not mean that I endorse the views they express. Its just that people should be able to be free of material on the Internet that insults them. The Internet is way most of the hate speech material is presented to the world.

Like for example, such things as the beliefs the nazis that of Jews, Blacks, Hispanics, etc. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. had an interesting statement in his Letter from Birmingham Jail that pertains to the subject at hand. Dr. King stated that any law that degrades human personality is unjust and that any law that uplifts human personality is just (Jacobus, 159). However, the First Amendment allows for freedom of speech and protects all speech.

There are statements made by certain organizations, groups, or people that degrade human personality or character. So, does this mean that the First Amendment is unjust to Dr. King? I believe if looked at it this way, he would believe that it is unjust. Henry David Thoreau also had a few ideas that correlate to the topic as well, such as ideas about society.

He states that men speak of moving society but have no resting-place without it (Jacobus, 144). What he is trying to say is that men are trying all the time to make our society a better one. Nevertheless, the question I have is how is this possible if such things like hate speech exist? People get mad when other people talk down on them and they usually don't get alone with those people.

This type of talk is all over the Internet, which everybody in society has access to. If people continue to post things on the Internet, how are people supposed to overcome all the hatred in our world today? Moreover, in order to move forward as a society like Thoreau says, we need to be in harmony with each other rather than fighting with each other. Thomas Jefferson states in the Declaration of Independence, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness (Jacobus, 76). This means that everybody is created equal and that everybody has the same rights as the next person. But in order to be happy, in my opinion, is to have no worries or serious conflicts.

If there are people who believe bad things about people than thats another big obstacle, which stands in the way of that happiness. This is because these people make life harder than it already is by making other people think such stereotypes are true and they pass it along to their children who end up doing the same thing. They use hate speech to try make people believe that they are superior to everyone who isn't just like them. In my experience with life, voice is a powerful weapon, it can be used negatively or positively. Either way, voice does a lot of damage in our society today, especially hate speech. Hate speech in this country, principally racist and anti-Semitic speech, has always been recognized as First Amendment protected.

The first amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Factual information and opinions are present in our society today. People have to take the information and figure out for themselves what is right and wrong. If people believe that talking about a particular race, organization, gender, or sexual preference in a bad way is a good thing than I'm sorry that they feel that way. In addition, that those people who use hate speech are just insecure about something in their lives and until they face it they will be miserable for the rest of their lives. Despite these claims I have made, some people believe that this is a free country where you have the right to express unpopular ideas, no matter how bad the ideas seem to be.

The way I believe we need to go about tackling this problem is by taking action. From the information I have obtained from my research, the best way at taking action towards hate speech is by more speech. By using persuasive speech like those who use hate speech, we can persuade people not to use hate speech. Because all hate speech is, is speech that makes people feel inferior or doleful. I believe that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would have to had agree with me if he was here in this day and time about the way at tackling this problem.

This method of problem solving is nonviolent and effective. Just like that in the Letter from Birmingham Jail that Dr. King wrote to the Clergyman. He never used any speech to insult or put down any race or social group. He wrote what he believed without this type of speech because he knew that the people, the majority, reading would take it personally and not listen to what he really had to say. In addition, like Thoreau says, 'Men generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them' (Jacobus, 134). This is what I believed Dr. King did when he spoke.

He got the attention of his audience then he preceded to persuading them to his beliefs. He never used hate speech even though it was legal for him to do so. Hate speech is legal and protected by the First Amendment but does that mean that people have to use it..