PDA

View Full Version : Most young Americans support 'hate speech' exemption in First Amendment



Teh One Who Knocks
10-28-2019, 11:41 AM
Celine Ryan, Investigative Reporter - Campus Reform


https://i.imgur.com/6omrKo8l.jpg

A majority of young Americans, including those who are college-aged, support rewriting the First Amendment to adjust for “hate speech.”

A recent survey conducted by the Campaign for Free Speech asked 1004 people about their attitudes toward the First Amendment. The results, published Wednesday, show that a majority of young adults believe the First Amendment “goes too far in allowing hate speech” and “should be updated.”

While 78 percent of young adults ages 18-34 understood the meaning of the First Amendment as written as allowing “anyone to say their opinion no matter what, and they are protected by law from any consequences of saying those thoughts or opinions,” most support altering the amendment in one form or another, including seven out of ten who said the speech of certain ideological groups should be more restricted.

When asked whether the First Amendment should be updated to adjust for hate speech and “reflect the cultural norms of today,” 59 percent of people between the ages of 18 and 34 were in favor of such an update. Just 33 percent opposed such a change, with the other eight percent saying they were unsure.

When asked more directly if “hate speech should be against the law,” 50 percent of people within the same age group answered “yes,” with 47 percent saying that an appropriate consequence for “hate speech” would include possible jail time.

An overwhelming majority of young adults agreed that the government should “should be able to take action against newspapers and TV stations that publish content that is biased, inflammatory, or false,” with 63 percent of people between the ages of 18 of 34 agreeing to such a policy. Thirty-six percent suggested possible jail time as an appropriate punishment for individuals at media outlets that published such content.

The survey also asked about “alternative media, such as online podcasts,” which “allow anyone to say anything, regardless of its accuracy." Thirty-four percent of young adults said that they would “support a government agency reviewing content put out by these alternative media sources.”

Surveyors then presented respondents with a number of controversial ideological groups, and asked to select each group they believed should “have their free speech restricted.” Those surveyed were presented with the following list: racists, Neo-Nazis, Radical Islamists, Holocaust deniers, anti-vaccine advocates, and climate change deniers.

An overwhelming 70 percent of young adults ages 18-34 selected at least one of the groups.

A majority of young people the same age also support limiting speech by time and place, with 61 percent agreeing with the statement “While I agree in principle with the idea of free speech, there are places where free speech should be restricted. For instance, in universities or on social media where there is the potential to be hurtful or offensive.” Only 28 percent disagreed with such restrictions.

Speech First President Nicole Neily reacted to these results in a statement to Campus Reform, saying, "these numbers are absolutely devastating. They reflect a profound misunderstanding not only of the importance of free speech, but also of the history of free speech and the First Amendment."

"Free speech is not a partisan issue," Neily continued, "it's a right that benefits all Americans, and in particular, the powerless, the unpopular, and minority viewpoints. A government that has the authority to decide what speech is acceptable and what is not can very easily squelch dissent - and that should concern everyone."

RBP
10-28-2019, 12:29 PM
hurtful or offensive? Yeek.

Teh One Who Knocks
10-28-2019, 12:39 PM
hurtful or offensive? Yeek.

:triggered:

Muddy
10-28-2019, 12:59 PM
Can we deport Farrakhan for it?

RBP
10-28-2019, 01:21 PM
Can we deport Farrakhan for it?

I think we will end up with the same speech definition as we use for racism. You can't be accused of hate speech if you are oppressed. That's called social justice advocacy.

Teh One Who Knocks
10-28-2019, 01:24 PM
I think we will end up with the same speech definition as we use for racism. You can't be accused of hate speech if you are oppressed. That's called social justice advocacy.

So everything Whitey says is hate speech, but nothing said to them qualifies as hate speech? :-k

Muddy
10-28-2019, 01:38 PM
I think we will end up with the same speech definition as we use for racism. You can't be accused of hate speech if you are oppressed. That's called social justice advocacy.

I didn't get to my punchline.. "We can deport him to the Nation of Islam"... :dance:

RBP
10-28-2019, 01:45 PM
So everything Whitey says is hate speech, but nothing said to them qualifies as hate speech? :-k

Can you come up with examples where this isn't the current thinking?

lost in melb.
10-29-2019, 01:24 AM
Not to rub salt in the wound but this link (https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/467684-70-percent-of-millennials-say-theyd-vote-for-a-socialist-poll) :whistle:

DemonGeminiX
10-29-2019, 09:56 PM
Sounds like 70% of millennials need to have their heads checked... or are in desperate need of a roundhouse kick to the head. Socialism is tyranny.

The principle of free speech covers all speech. If you allow the government to regulate one group's speech, then that gives them precedent to regulate every groups' speech. So even if you despise hate speech, you should defend to the death the asshole's right to use hate speech, because if you don't and you allow the government to limit their rights or take them away, then sooner or later, the government will use that to regulate or take away your rights as well.

Teh One Who Knocks
10-29-2019, 10:23 PM
Sounds like 70% of millennials need to have their heads checked... or are in desperate need of a roundhouse kick to the head. Socialism is tyranny.

The principle of free speech covers all speech. If you allow the government to regulate one group's speech, then that gives them precedent to regulate every groups' speech. So even if you despise hate speech, you should defend to the death the asshole's right to use hate speech, because if you don't and you allow the government to limit their rights or take them away, then sooner or later, the government will use that to regulate or take away your rights as well.Not to mention the fact of, who decides what is hate speech? Anything that hurts a millennial's feelings is hate speech to them.

lost in melb.
10-30-2019, 12:52 AM
Sounds like 70% of millennials need to have their heads checked... or are in desperate need of a roundhouse kick to the head. Socialism is tyranny.

The principle of free speech covers all speech. If you allow the government to regulate one group's speech, then that gives them precedent to regulate every groups' speech. So even if you despise hate speech, you should defend to the death the asshole's right to use hate speech, because if you don't and you allow the government to limit their rights or take them away, then sooner or later, the government will use that to regulate or take away your rights as well.

Please stop with this kind of logical argument. Not welcome in this day and age :hand:

DemonGeminiX
10-30-2019, 02:28 AM
Please stop with this kind of logical argument. Not welcome in this day and age :hand:

:oops:

Sorry.

Godfather
10-30-2019, 06:21 AM
I just don't get it.. this is my age group, under 34. This is an age group that's supposedly distrusting and skeptical of the government though isn't it? So why would they want to empower the powers that be to legislate what you can and cannot say? Did these people not have to read a Margaret Atwood or George Orwell book in grade school?

Clearly they're not thinking this through at all. Really horrifying because at this point I think these laws are actually going to happen in our lifetime.

DemonGeminiX
10-30-2019, 09:18 AM
I just don't get it.. this is my age group, under 34. This is an age group that's supposedly distrusting and skeptical of the government though isn't it? So why would they want to empower the powers that be to legislate what you can and cannot say? Did these people not have to read a Margaret Atwood or George Orwell book in grade school?

Clearly they're not thinking this through at all. Really horrifying because at this point I think these laws are actually going to happen in our lifetime.

No, they haven't. Socialists and Communists have infiltrated our school system. They're the ones teaching and setting the agendas in the US educational system now. And it's worse at the collegiate level. So these kids have been brought up believing that more government control is better, that feelings trump facts and logic, when this nation was built upon the idea that government could not be trusted, and you should think for yourself and not buy what you're being force fed. And it blows me away that I see people my age that are buying into this horseshit too. They're raising their kids to believe this shit.

lost in melb.
10-31-2019, 01:24 AM
No, they haven't. Socialists and Communists have infiltrated our school system. They're the ones teaching and setting the agendas in the US educational system now. And it's worse at the collegiate level. So these kids have been brought up believing that more government control is better, that feelings trump facts and logic, when this nation was built upon the idea that government could not be trusted, and you should think for yourself and not buy what you're being force fed. And it blows me away that I see people my age that are buying into this horseshit too. They're raising their kids to believe this shit.

I would beg to differ and say at this stage that the PC brigade has a fairly robust strong-arm on ethical agendas. This mirrors society in general. Socialists and Communists? It's not that bad , imo

DemonGeminiX
10-31-2019, 01:41 AM
I would beg to differ and say at this stage that the PC brigade has a fairly robust strong-arm on ethical agendas. This mirrors society in general. Socialists and Communists? It's not that bad , imo

Wrong. It is that bad. And it'll get worse if they don't change course. I remember what I was taught in school, and I know what they're teaching kids in school now, and I'm appalled. I have nephews in school and I hear about everything. It's absolutely disgusting how they went from teaching civics and what this country was really about when I was in school to teaching a bullshit fantasy of what we could be if we just tried, when other countries have tried what the teachers are suggesting and the fantasy suggestion always failed miserably throughout history.

They're teaching kids to be down on Capitalism, which is what made this country the economic powerhouse that it is. They're teaching that it would be better to put every facet of all of our lives in the hands of big government, which is the exact opposite of the principles this country was founded on and famous for. The PC brigade defies the principles of free speech and social accountability. Ethics is only good when you have the freedom of choice to follow them. When you're strong arm forced to adhere to any agenda, it's tyranny.

lost in melb.
10-31-2019, 01:49 AM
They're teaching kids to be down on Capitalism, which is what made this country the economic powerhouse that it is. They're teaching that it would be better to put every facet of all of our lives in the hands of big government, which is the exact opposite of the principles this country was founded on and famous for.

Well it sure isn't the case in Australia. Very little politics in our school system.

Except they do encourage tolerance and celebration of ethnic diversity ( being diverse schools). I would put this down to our society being largely multi-cultural at this point.

DemonGeminiX
10-31-2019, 02:13 AM
We're not talking about Australia.

There's nothing wrong with celebrating diversity, except when you're demonizing the majority to do it. You don't celebrate multiculturalism by conditioning people to believe that white people are bad, which is exactly what they're doing in the good ol' USA now.

lost in melb.
10-31-2019, 02:31 AM
We're not talking about Australia.

There's nothing wrong with celebrating diversity, except when you're demonizing the majority to do it. You don't celebrate multiculturalism by conditioning people to believe that white people are bad, which is exactly what they're doing in the good ol' USA now.

Australia is my reference for comparison. Broadly speaking there are many commonalities, but not in this issue. I wish I knew more about why. Must be related to the racial history of the countries...

And I agree. It's a total concoction