First article “Hate Speech is Not Free Speech” by Scriptor Obscura
The article is a response to a Supreme Court ruling in favor of bigotry because of the freedom of expression clause in the first amendment. The author of the article Scriptor Obscura, argues that free speech should be regulated in cases such as the Ku Klux Klan, violent Neo-Nazi groups, and the Westboro church. Obscura argues that people should not have the right to make repulsive, rude, and inconsiderate messages of hate to others because of a person’s race, sexual-orientation, religion or nationality whereas the right to yell fire in a theatre or bomb in an airport unless is regulated. The article mainly focuses on the Westboro, which is a Baptist church that is known for its extreme stance against homosexuality and its protest activities such as picketing funerals and burning the American flag. The Westboro people are able to perform their actions and express their hate towards the homosexual community because they are protected by the first amendment. The author argues that the Westboro people’s behavior should not be tolerated in any situation because they infringes upon the rights and liberties of others. Obscura concludes stating that Americans should not have the right to unlimited free speech as the Westboro are a great example of the author’s reasoning ans statement.
The article is reliable because of the author’s use of references and experience. The author Scriptor Obscura, has written other articles regarding social issues thus showing that he has prior experience.Obscura also refers to a Supreme Court Justice, a court case, and a statement made by thr Southern Poverty Law Center to support his argument.
Relation to topic
The focus of my topic is hate speech and whether or not hate speech is or should be protected by the first amendment. The article relates to my topic because it focuses on why free speech should be regulated thus providing information for one side of the argument. The article gives a strong example, the Westboros, that is helpful in learning about the group. The article gives me another group that i can find more information on that is relevant to my topic. The conclusion of the article, that free speech should not be unlimited, presents an argument that is very useful in my topic.
Second article “Hate Slime, The Orwellian new law thta wasn’t” by Dahlia Lithwick
In the article, Dahlia Lithwick posses the question of who should be protected by hate- crime laws. The article is a response to a hate-crime bill that was not passed . The hate -crime bill would add crimes motivated by a victim’s sexual orientation to the existing hate-crimes law. The argument is that women, gays ,and the disabled should not be protected by the laws because they were not historically discriminated for abuse and oppressed. Hate crimes on groups based on religion, race, color, and nationality are considered more legitimate. Lithwick argues that there is a misconception of the consequences of the bill if it were passed. Lithwick states that opponents of the bill are concerned that non-criminal religious free speech would be placed under the hate-crime law thus making “preaching” against homosexuality a crimnal offense. The opponents’ points of view are considered inaccurate by Lithwick because the notion that one can be jailed for his or her moral statements does not reflect the truth about the hate-crime laws. Lithwick states that if the bill were passed, speech would be considered a criminal offense only when it presents imminent violence otherwise speech would be protected.
The article can be considered reliable because the author uses ample references and explains the examples she gives. The author refers to documents in American history and court cases thus making the article more reliable. The author has a strong background in writing as she is a writer and editor and has writen about other legal issues.
Relation to topic
The article relates to my topic as it talks about the argument of whether or not hate speech based on sexual orientation that presents violence should be a criminal offense. My topic focuses on what should or should not be considered a criminal offense based on the first amendment. The article is helpful because it presents a current argument that is presented in today’s society. Through the article i am able to get more information about the bills that are being debated on that are very relevant to my topic. The article is also helpful as it provides references that i could researh and find more information on.
The first blog post I found talks about how the number of hate groups has risen in recent years. The blog is written by Latinos Against Hate Speech group. The article states that hate groups have risen by forty-eight percent since the year 2000 according to the Southern poverty Law Center (SPLC) , a civil law firm. The article focuses on hate speech in the media both on the television and radio specifically against the undocumented Latino immigrants. The blogger says “Hate speech against the undocumented Latinos has led to increase in hate crimes against all Latinos.” The undocumented Latino Immigrants are being blamed for the problems in society. Hate speech and crimes against all Latinos in general have increased. The blogger is writing to Congress for more action to be taken in protectiong the Latinos. The blog relates to my topic because it talks about discrimination based on both nationality and race. All Latinos regardless of whether or not he or she is a legal or illegal immigrant are widely discriminated against by the use of hate words. Discriminators claim their right to freedom of speech and expression when using hate speech thus nothing can be done to stop the hate speech which lead to hate crimes because of the first amendment’s protection of individual rights.
The second blog i found was by a blogger Jillian C. Yolk. In the article Yolk talks about the true meaning of hate speech. Yolk discusses the question of what is considered hate speech and what should be done to stop hate speech. The article talks about facebook groups such as “Hate Israel” or “hate Jews” and whether they are to considered hate speech because they both oppose religion and a regime. Yolk states “is it permissible for a pastor, priest, or imam to argue against homosexuality based on religious (Biblical or Qur’anic) arguments? “Yolk posses the question of whether if when words such as “faggs” or “homo” are used by a person who is not a priest or pastor is different from when the words are used by a priest or pastor in a religious setting. The third question about the meaning of hate speech Yolk posses is whether use of racist words are considered hate speech. Yolk gives an example of the Dave Chapelle Show, whereby Dave Chappelle, an African American comedian uses the “N” word in his comedy sketches. The question is whether the “N” word when used by African Americans is considered hate speech or if the word is only considered hate speech when used in a negative connotation. Yolk concludes by posing a question of whether America should be a nation whereby abusive words are considered a crime or if groups should continue to suffer by the discriminatory words. The blog relates to my topic because it talks about what actually constitutes hate speech and whehter anything should be done. The examples Yolk gives are related to my topic and gives me a broader view of my focus thus i am able to get more information that relates to my topic.