Free speech

[Tonus]

Hate speech. Acts that do signifficant physical and or emotional harm. Discrimination in the work place. Discrimination amongst peers. Sectarianism, propaganda, propping up of the "intelligentsia."

Acts that do physical harm and workplace discrimination are already against the law. You'll need to explain what sorts of hate speech towards religion you feel should be curtailed, and what you mean by discrimination amongst peers.

I'd be wary of calling for laws against propaganda and propping up of ideologies if you are a religious person.

[JonDarbyXIII]

Hate speech. Acts that do signifficant physical and or emotional harm. Discrimination in the work place. Discrimination amongst peers. Sectarianism, propaganda, propping up of the "intelligentsia."

"Christians are stupid" - OK, though not necessarily true
"Christians believe stupid things" - OK
"Christianity should be mocked" - OK
"Christianity should be destroyed" - OK, though I don't necessarily agree
"Christians should be killed" - NOT OK

[FatAndFaithless]

@ OP, you can't just list a bunch of things that are already crimes and ask us if we're "against" them. Provide what you consider to be examples of these crimes, and we can have a discussion.

[KevinM1]

Oh no! Not the intelligentsia!

[Dystopia]

I think that when it comes to the workplace discrimination for arbitrary traits that don't impact productivity or performance should obviously be illegal. You can't discriminate against Christians, but you also can't discriminate against atheists, the same way you can't discriminate against ethnicity or sexes; those are variables with no impact on job performance. IMO when it comes to this I think there should be laws protecting discriminated against groups, because otherwise everyone knows employers would not hire people based on a variety of magically made up irrelevant factors that would target some categories (usually minorities, including atheists) and create new categories of unemployed.

As for anything else, free speech is free speech. I consider something hate speech if it means inciting violence, hatred, active discrimination or intense dislike for a certain group or person. If it's just criticism, then it's ok, you may not like it - But think positively; you are also entitled to criticize atheists if you wish, you can call us a bunch of immoral satan worshippers with no purpose in life, it's your right.

[Cyberman]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone here not believe that their should be freedom of speech and religious expression in our country?

You are aware that we don't all live in one country here, yes? If you mean America like I must assume, I wish you'd say as much.

Should the humiliation of Christians possibly be considered a hate-crime? Where do you draw the line and does no line take us down a slippery slope?

"Humiliation"? Or hurt feelings? Because if you don't want to be laughed at for your beliefs, get less laughable beliefs. Oh, and if you truly want an equitable system of respect, wherein even daring to mock childish beliefs is a hate crime, your side needs to stop vicariously threatening people with postmortem punishment simply for not automatically sharing them.

Love over tongue-lashing or na?[/i]

Sodium?

[Brian37]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone here not believe that their should be freedom of speech and religious expression in our country?

Should the humiliation of Christians possibly be considered a hate-crime? Where do you draw the line and does no line take us down a slippery slope?


Love over tongue-lashing or na?[/i]

What the?

Holy crap. Nice passive aggressive falsely playing victim.

No one I consider sane, and I do not speak for all atheists, but the ones I consider sane are NOT interested in using government force to end religion. But if one cannot provide evidence for any claim they make, it is not our duty to remain silent and never challenge it or ridicule it. Do not confuse human rights with evidence for a claim.

You can claim till you are blue in the face that the Yankees won the Superbowl, no one is going to stop you. You have the right to make whatever claim you want and others have the right to say "that is not true", "where is your evidence" or even "bullshit".

Only an idiot thinks being insulted is worse than being murdered over an insult. In the west you and I get to go home at night without fear off mob violence, or government arrest or state sanctioned murder over mere beliefs.

Human rights are a given, but ideas and claims do not deserve a pedestal. There is a difference between bigoted hate, and hate of an utterance that someone has no evidence for and demands special rights to be free from criticism. NO ONE deserves a pedestal. Taboos are what fascist state worship like North Korea demand and fascist theocracies like Saudi Arabia demand.

---

Just out of curiosity, does anyone here not believe that their should be freedom of speech and religious expression in our country?

Should the humiliation of Christians possibly be considered a hate-crime? Where do you draw the line and does no line take us down a slippery slope?


Love over tongue-lashing or na?[/i]

What the?

Holy crap. Nice passive aggressive falsely playing victim.

No one I consider sane, and I do not speak for all atheists, but the ones I consider sane are NOT interested in using government force to end religion. But if one cannot provide evidence for any claim they make, it is not our duty to remain silent and never challenge it or ridicule it. Do not confuse human rights with evidence for a claim.

You can claim till you are blue in the face that the Yankees won the Superbowl, no one is going to stop you. You have the right to make whatever claim you want and others have the right to say "that is not true", "where is your evidence" or even "bullshit".

Only an idiot thinks being insulted is worse than being murdered over an insult. In the west you and I get to go home at night without fear off mob violence, or government arrest or state sanctioned murder over mere beliefs.

Human rights are a given, but ideas and claims do not deserve a pedestal. There is a difference between bigoted hate, and hate of an utterance that someone has no evidence for and demands special rights to be free from criticism. NO ONE deserves a pedestal. Taboos are what fascist state worship like North Korea demand and fascist theocracies like Saudi Arabia demand.

---

Don't know how I double posted, sorry.

[Invisible Sky Fairy]

Honestly....should religions even get the "hate speech" designation? I mean I look it up and from what I can find every other thing that insults toward can get the hate speech label is something you don't get to pick. "It is wrong to insult you for the color of the skin you were born with", "It is wrong to insult you for the disability you were born with", "It is wrong to insult you for the wrong beliefs you can get rid of but insisting on keeping"?

Edit: Crud, I kind of sort of bumped this, didn't I?

[Brian37]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone here not believe that their should be freedom of speech and religious expression in our country?

Should the humiliation of Christians possibly be considered a hate-crime? Where do you draw the line and does no line take us down a slippery slope?


Love over tongue-lashing or na?[/i]

No empathetic person, I would call sane, no matter their label, should suggest hating others merely because they exist.

But I do hate bad claims and bad logic and those claims should never get a taboo staltus, even if the other has the right to make the claim.

I can value the likes of Muslims like Malala and Muslim Senator Keith Ellison and the likes of Martin Luther King Jr, and the likes of Ann Frank. But that does not mean I have to like god claims as ideas.

I am a flaming social liberal for mixed religious marriages and gay marriage. I am certainly willing to vote for believing politicians who hold the same economic and pluralistic views I do.

BUT that does not mean what they hold to be true, even the non violent religious people. Liberals and moderates of ALL religions always fail to understand that whatever good they point to in their holy books, they are still using the exact same books with the same words, that others use to justify bigotry and violence. THAT is something everyone should accept and be aware of.

Human rights are a given, but ideas by themselves should never get blind value and should ALWAYS be open to criticism and blasphemy.

Bigoted hate is ignorance. Hate of bad logic should be the norm and is simply a matter of evidence.

[The Grand Nudger]

Should the humiliation of Christians possibly be considered a hate-crime?

If it were, we'd have to baker act the lot of em for fear of self harm, now wouldn't we? Is there anything more humiliating than the things that christians take it upon themselves to say? If there is...I'd like to hear it. Bunch of filthy, broken creatures whose chosen path for escaping the righteous judgement they have worked so hard to earn through their endless and pointless sinning is to have a better man strung up in their stead...or so I've heard them say.......

What do you think, have you had this discussion with them?

Where do you draw the line and does no line take us down a slippery slope?

Where speech causes palpable and physical damage to ones person or livelihood - as usual.