Politicspolitics

Tue Sep 12, 2017, 11:41 PM

Why Hate Speech Is Not Free Speech

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/45717-focus-why-hate-speech-is-not-free-speech

"SNIP.......

Like violence, hate speech can also be a physical imposition on the freedom of others. That is because language has a psychological effect imposed physically — on the neural system, with long-term crippling effects.

Here is the reason:

All thought is carried out by neural circuitry — it does not float in air. Language neurally activates thought. Language can thus change brains, both for the better and the worse. Hate speech changes the brains of those hated for the worse, creating toxic stress, fear and distrust — all physical, all in one’s neural circuitry active every day. This internal harm can be even more severe than an attack with a fist. It imposes on the freedom to think and therefore act free of fear, threats, and distrust. It imposes on one’s ability to think and act like a fully free citizen for a long time.

That’s why hate speech imposes on the freedom of those targeted by the hate. Since being free in a free society requires not imposing on the freedom of others, hate speech does not fall under the category of free speech.

Hate speech can also change the brains of those with mild prejudice, moving it towards hate and threatening action. When hate is physically in your brain, then you think hate and feel hate, you are moved to act to carry out what you physically, in your neural system, think and feel.



.......SNIP"

Food for thought.

25 replies, 303 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 25 replies Author Time Post
Reply Why Hate Speech Is Not Free Speech (Original post)
gowiththrottleup Sep 12 OP
Nostrings Sep 12 #1
SolChic Sep 13 #10
Shkreli Sep 12 #2
Magyar Heidinn Sep 13 #3
Cold Warrior Sep 13 #4
Da Mannn Sep 13 #5
Banshee 3 Actual Sep 13 #6
357blackhawk Sep 13 #7
cologeek Sep 13 #8
foia Sep 13 #9
oflguy Sep 13 #11
gowiththrottleup Sep 13 #12
oflguy Sep 13 #17
oflguy Sep 13 #22
I814U2CY Sep 13 #19
TM999 Sep 13 #13
oflguy Sep 13 #23
TM999 Sep 13 #25
fszwfnj Sep 13 #14
Carl Sep 13 #15
I814U2CY Sep 13 #16
Aldar Sep 13 #18
_eek Sep 13 #20
oflguy Sep 13 #24
WhiskeyMakesMeHappy Sep 13 #21

Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Tue Sep 12, 2017, 11:55 PM

1. The author neglected to define 'hate speech'.

Imagine that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nostrings (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 01:05 AM

10. Not to mention Do we outlaw everything that imposes on anyone's neural system? Who gets to

pick? I want a turn! The writers opinion just made me physically ill

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Tue Sep 12, 2017, 11:59 PM

2. George Lakoff is a kook. Ban speech and trigger oaths. Just do it. Lets get this over with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 12:12 AM

3. An intolerant hateful communist spewing

his own brand of hate speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 12:15 AM

4. Nope. Lackoff's basic premise is that you have a right not to be offended

Because being offended could make you sad or mad (hurt your brain). Sorry, the premise is rubbish.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 12:20 AM

5. Liberal Dictionary, Hate Speech: anything a Liberal disagrees with.

This is the problem. Letting a Liberal define what is hate speech, always ends up letting a Liberal censoring all opposition speech. This is the Liberal goal: to control speech is to outlaw Free Speech.

This is why Liberals are attacking free speech all across the country. They may claim their motives are pure, but they are opposed to freedom as we know it. Liberals hate all that is good and will seek to destroy western civilization to rebuild their own enlightened tyranny.

you cannot destroy hate speech without destroying freedom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 12:25 AM

6. Opinions are like assholes...........

Physical actions can be crimes thoughts and opinions cannot in a free society

That's why Democrats get confused

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 12:28 AM

7. of course "hate speech" is anything

George, or you, disagrees with. People like George, and the readers of Rawstory and Mother Jones, often engage in "hate speech" directed towards the working class, rural people, gun owners, Mormons, Christians, or anyone that isn't fit their view of how the world should be. However, an honest criticism of, say, Islam would be "hate speech". Keith Ellison's racism and antisemitism is not "hate" while David Duke's is.
Do you and George (who is a left wing ideologue like fellow crack pot Noam Chomsky) apply these laws to people like Bill Mahar? Anyone on MSNBC?
The left has become dogmatic, anti reason, anti science, and totalitarian.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Human_Rights_Commission_free_speech_controversy

Oh, and it isn't news, it is Marxist bullshit. This site displays the same amount of journalistic integrity as Tass and Pravda during the USSR years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 12:41 AM

8. Junk food for thought maybe.

It looks sweet and tasty and having it would make you feel oh so good. But ultimately it's bad for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 12:50 AM

9. The phrase "white privilege" is hate speech

Saying Republicans don't care about *insert victim here* is also hate speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 01:10 AM

11. So when do we arrest Louis Farrakhan?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #11)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 02:02 AM

12. Kick him off your website whenever you dam well please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Reply #12)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 07:09 AM

17. So hate speech should carry no consequences then?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #17)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 09:53 AM

22. If hate speech is ok

Then what was the diatribe for?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Reply #12)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 08:27 AM

19. More hate speech from you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 02:36 AM

13. Nope, not food for thought.

Lakoff is way off here. He is a linguist not a constitutional lawyer or even a psychologist. He is spewing bullshit that many here will stupidly agree with.

If y'all want this reality, please dear God, leave. Seriously, go to fucking Canada or the UK. They don't have our Constitutionally protected free speech foundations. Y'all will be happier. We will be happier.

No, your feelings getting hurt is completely fucking irrelevant. You may not like my speech and I may not like yours but NEITHER of us gets to shut the other down.

Push the bullshit further and the Republic itself is in jeopardy. Think very carefully if you want this type of pseudo-science to replace our current 1st Amendment rights. Consider carefully the negative consequences even to yourself and your team if this becomes law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM999 (Reply #13)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 09:58 AM

23. I'm beginning to understand why "safe spaces" are so critical to liberals

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oflguy (Reply #23)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 10:40 AM

25. I wouldn't care if they set up their own damned private safe spaces.

I do care when they try to force their fucking safe space mentality on the public sphere. I draw the damned line there and will fight it to the bitter damned end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 03:49 AM

14. There is way too much stupid in the article

to fully read. Classic case of being articulate but an idiot. A liberal trait if there ever was one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 05:10 AM

15. I looked and don't see any footnotes attached.

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.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 05:39 AM

16. The OP is hate speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 08:19 AM

18. ever here of the 1st amend?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 08:35 AM

20. "Food for thought."

It turned to ashes in my mouth and sour in my stomach.

Like almost every thing I see written on the idea of hate speech, it fails to properly define hate speech, leaving it in an ambiguous state, much like pornography. "I know it when I see it"

Seeing what the Left has done with once solid definitions, like rape, race and gender, I think we should err on the side of freedom and disregard all calls to regulate speech.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to _eek (Reply #20)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 10:08 AM

24. Its pretty bad when they can't even get gender right

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gowiththrottleup (Original post)

Wed Sep 13, 2017, 08:37 AM

21. The 1A was put into the Constitution with people like this author in mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Politicspolitics