Now this should be illegal

[Machjo]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7hILnHsNKE

Now this is hate speech and a legitimate target for protest.

[bush_cheney2004]

"Hate speech" is perfectly legal in New York. As are protests of any speech, hateful or otherwise.

[Machjo]

"Hate speech" is perfectly legal in New York. As are protests of any speech, hateful or otherwise.

There is a difference between regular free speech and hate speech. I realize hate speech is legal in the US. I'm saying it shouldn't be. The guy in that video is not just expressing his opinion, but inciting hate towards non-Muslims, thus also putting Muslims at risk owing to the backlash it can cause.

The same, by the way, applies the other way around:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/world/21muslim.html?_r=1

Essentially, those two groups feed on one another, and are really of the same mind, just mirror images of one another. Just look at the following videos and tell me the difference between them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7hILnHsNKE

Except for the chosen self-identification of the two groups in this video, they look the same to me.

[bush_cheney2004]

There is a difference between regular free speech and hate speech. I realize hate speech is legal in the US. I'm saying it shouldn't be. The guy in that video is not just expressing his opinion, but inciting hate towards non-Muslims, thus also putting Muslims at risk owing to the backlash it can cause.....

What you are saying strikes at the core of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Did President Bush "incite hate" towards terrorists?

The solution is more speech, not bans on hate speech. There are existing laws for inciting riot or conspiracy for assault and murder.

[Jack Weber]

Islamofascism at its' finest...

And that hateful dillweed has every right to say that vile crap.

Instead of trying to shut him up using infantile legislation,it would be far more preferrable if someone who was walking by called him on the fact that Islam was a religion of "peace".And maybe questioned him on that and how he would reconcile his hateful speech with that selling point the Islamoapologists keep falling back on.

Clearly what this fool is taling about is incongruent with modern civilization and would only be accepted by backwards troglodytes of the highest order...Laughing at him publicly would be another approach...

Edited August 22, 2010 by Jack Weber

[ToadBrother]

There is a difference between regular free speech and hate speech. I realize hate speech is legal in the US. I'm saying it shouldn't be. The guy in that video is not just expressing his opinion, but inciting hate towards non-Muslims, thus also putting Muslims at risk owing to the backlash it can cause.

Censoring and punishing people doesn't make such sentiments go away. Why people think "if we just had a law" that somehow this kind of behavior would disappear.

The best way to defeat such people is to take them on in the Commons. I wouldn't want Lictor shoved in jail. It's much more useful to whoop is ass on MLW.

That's the price of real liberty, my friend. The bad with the good.

[Yesterday]

I have to agree with both Jack and TB on this one, in fact couldn't of said it better. Really, if we didn't allow free speech we would never know what all these hateful crackpots would be thinking, feeling, contemplating. Now that would be scary. A squeaky wheel gets grease for many reasons.

[Topaz]

I'm all for free speech, so someone should have went up to this guy and said to him that if the US is so bad, WHY is HE living here? Why isn't he living in a muslim country, that he says is better?

[kimmy]

I'm all for free speech, so someone should have went up to this guy and said to him that if the US is so bad, WHY is HE living here? Why isn't he living in a muslim country, that he says is better?

Because it's his duty to spread Islam to the unbelievers, whether they want it or not.

-k

[GostHacked]

Because it's his duty to spread Islam to the unbelievers, whether they want it or not.

-k

This is how most religions get spread around.

[bloodyminded]

There is a difference between regular free speech and hate speech. I realize hate speech is legal in the US. I'm saying it shouldn't be. The guy in that video is not just expressing his opinion, but inciting hate towards non-Muslims, thus also putting Muslims at risk owing to the backlash it can cause.

The same, by the way, applies the other way around:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/21/world/21muslim.html?_r=1

Essentially, those two groups feed on one another, and are really of the same mind, just mirror images of one another. Just look at the following videos and tell me the difference between them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7hILnHsNKE

Except for the chosen self-identification of the two groups in this video, they look the same to me.

As BC_2004 pointed out, there are already laws on the books against genuine incitement to violence. The onus is high, but that's as it should be. What the Americans don't need is to restrict speech that isn't obviously dangerous. Neither do they need the farce of the draconian Canadian HRC's.

Slippery-slope arguments are easily misused, but I think they apply to this sort of thing quite well.