Hate speech in the United States is legal and will continue to be legal, most likely forever. That is not really up for debate. But if the United States could have federal laws punishing hate speech, should we? How would that work?
Outlawing hate speech would be a slippery slope situation. The law may be aimed at the n-word and similar group based slurs, but it could accidentally slide into outlawing all sorts of words that typically are not so socially loaded and unacceptable. Essentially, if this speech is not legal, then it is a question of how far will the law go before most offensive words are outlawed. Before you know it, a person is being sued for saying “Ok Boomer.” That is why “The 1 for All Foundation” fights for this right regardless of whether or not they think it is right.
The n-word, the f-slur aimed at non-hetero people and even the ones that have cycled out of common English “slang” can be really hurtful. Slurs and hate can be a factor in a person’s clinical depression, has made people feel the need to live their lives differently than they would like and contributed to suicide rates.
In Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, a man was arrested for calling a cop fascist, which in the 1940s, post World War II, was a very offensive term. The Supreme Court unanimously upheld this ruling, claiming that the mere utterance of the word was guaranteed to cause problems. This concept is referred to as “fighting words.”
The concept of fighting words is not really brought up in court anymore. To be honest, it coming back as stringent as it was then would hurt the freedom of speech. Fascist refers to a person’s thoughts and ideas on how government should be run, and that is a word that was a public concern in that period.
These words do not enhance public discourse, empower the people or the press. They more so contribute to the violation of lifestyles. Hateful words have turned into hateful actions, systematic oppression, murders, suicides and other definitively terrible things.
The point is that hate speech sucks, and if it could be outlawed, it should be. That is definitely not an option, because it could not be done in a clean-cut way. So, that leaves us wondering what can we do so that these words do not manifest into further oppressing minority groups. Walking away leaves things unresolved.
However, fighting and arguing can create more hate and conviction because no one wants to be wrong in an argument. So, that leaves talking it out and hopefully reaching a place of reason. This conversation should come with education. Come to “The 1 for All” Oswego State event Think Before You Speech on Nov. 23, in Marano Campus Center room 133 to learn more.
Photo from Pixabay
