Is Hate Speech Protected?

[seer]

Not according to the Portland Mayor.

Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler has called for the federal government to pull its permit for an alt-right protest scheduled for next Sunday, June 4.
"Trump Free Speech Rally Portland" is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m. at federally controlled Terry Schrunk Plaza in downtown Portland.

Another protest called #MarchAgainstSharia is scheduled for Saturday, June 10, also at the Terry Schrunk Plaza.
Joey Gibson, a Vancouver resident and video blogger, is organizing both gatherings. He has invited Kyle Chapman, an online celebrity known as "Based Stickman," to the June 4 rally. Chapman was arrested at a Berkeley, California rally earlier this year on charges of suspected felony assault when he allegedly hit a left-wing protester in the head with a signpost.

"My concern is they're coming here to peddle a message of hatred and bigotry," Wheeler said in a news conference Monday. "They have a First Amendment right to speak, but hate speech is not protected."
The ACLU of Oregon tweeted the mayor cannot revoke or deny a permit "based on the viewpoint of the demonstrators ... we are all free to reject and protest ideas we don't agree with. That is a core, fundamental freedom of the United States."

The "alt-right" group has pledged to fight "antifa," a group of militant leftists. KATU's news partners at Willamette Week wrote an in-depth piece explaining what each group stands for and why they've taken to Portland's streets to fight each other.



http://katu.com/news/local/mayor-whe...test-on-june-4

[ke7ejx]

Basically, if you don't like it or it offends you it must be hate speech...

[NorrinRadd]

If you believe in the Constitution, then yes, it is.

If you're a snowflake, then no -- The only speech that is protected is speech that is so vapid that it doesn't need to be protected in the first place.

[mikewhitney]

Maybe the mayor needs to study the US Constitution.

The right to free speech exists apart from the First Amendment -- the First Amendment only restricts the powers of the government -- to stop the govt from making laws against free speech.

How does he define hate speech? maybe "We don't like the mayor"?

[Sparko]

Hate speech is exactly what the first amendment does protect. Who needs to protect nice speech? The first amendment is about controversial speech. Now you can't incite violence or panic, but you can promote any speech you want. That is why the KKK are allowed to have marches and speeches. As long as they keep it peaceful.

[Zymologist]

There should be no leeway for hateful or bigoted speech in a free society.

[Meh Gerbil]

The Constitution protects hate speech from the Federal Government.
Its ability to protect you from the thug you're insulting has met with only moderate success.

[Jedidiah]

There should be no leeway for hateful or bigoted speech in a free society.

You forgot your sarcasm tags.

[Zymologist]

You forgot your sarcasm tags.

I have a deep-seated personal aversion to sarcasm tags.

[seer]

I have a deep-seated personal aversion to sarcasm tags.

Do they trigger you?

[Zymologist]

Do they trigger you?

I want to interpret them sarcastically when I see them, but that might be too meta.

[Sparko]

I want to interpret them sarcastically when I see them, but that might be too meta.

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

You don't say?

[Zymologist]

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

You don't say?

But what if that's sarcastic, too? I think we've just discovered something amazing: the infinitely more-sarcastically meta sarcasm tags.

[Mountain Man]

If you believe in the Constitution, then yes, it is.

If you're a snowflake, then no -- The only speech that is protected is speech that is so vapid that it doesn't need to be protected in the first place.

As the saying goes, offensive speech is protected speech by definition, because inoffensive speech doesn't need protection.

[Darth Executor]

As the saying goes, offensive speech is protected speech by definition, because inoffensive speech doesn't need protection.

These days even inoffensive speech needs protection from SJWs.