Hate speech should not be protected

[European blood]

By JONATHAN RICH on October 3, 2011

Every time a bigot gets caught using hate speech against minorities, the usual suspects come out of the woodwork to cry crocodile tears over “political correctness.”


Jonathan Rich

Adina Solomon is a perfect example of this with her column “We’ve become too politically correct” (Sept. 27). Solomon defends Texas high school student Dakota Ary’s right to make homophobic slurs, arguing that “our culture has become too sensitive” and “political correctness is the tool of dictatorships.” Solomon claims that Ary was suspended simply for voicing his opinion on homosexuality.

However, Solomon gets the facts wrong. Ary has been responsible for repeated acts of anti-gay harassment against his teacher Mr. Franks, who Ary perceives to be gay, according to The Dallas Voice.

During Mr. Franks’ German class, the topic of religion in Germany was being discussed without any reference to homosexuality. In front of the class, Ary looked directly at Mr. Franks and said, “Gays can’t be Christians; homosexuality is wrong.” Ary was not being disciplined because of he voiced his opinion but rather due to his attempt to devalue his teacher’s class presentation on the basis of his perceived sexual orientation.

Ary has the right to express his beliefs in the proper context, but harassing his teacher in class is an offense that warrants disciplinary action. Aside from the blatant factual inaccuracy of Solomon’s source, Fox News, the much deeper issue at stake is her implicit assumption about the nature of language and harm.

Speech is a form of physical action — it requires the use of the tongue, lips, jaw, vocal chords and lungs. Like any other form of physical action, speech should be free and unrestricted until it causes harm to others. For this reason, the First Amendment guarantee of free expression is not unlimited. Many forms of harmful speech have been restricted, including false advertisements, fraud, libel, slander, perjury, plagiarism, insider trading, copyright infringement, and death threats.

I would add hate speech to that list. It would be any speech that disparages a person based on social characteristics such as race, class, religion, gender or sexual orientation. Critics sometimes object that members of minority groups are being overly sensitive. But sometimes words can hurt. Hate speech attacks a person’s self-esteem, denying them the dignity of acceptance. This can often have life-threatening consequences, demonstrated by the epidemic of gay teen suicides in response to homophobic bullying.
Hate speech creates an atmosphere of confrontation that can lead to physical violence. It can also affect bystanders by reinforcing their own prejudices and giving them an opportunity to express their negative views openly. Hate speech also reinforces social dominance through the use of stereotypes, which restricts the rights, opportunities, and freedoms of minorities.

Language itself is not neutral and the words we use influence our perception of reality. Negative stereotypes cloud our perceptions of minorities and allow us to generalize their behavior to the entire group, not just the individual.

Ary’s homophobic statements are clearly harmful to Mr. Franks. They attack his self-esteem, they undermine his academic credibility and they negatively shape other students’ judgments of the class lesson. Hate speech has no place in a democratic society.

— Jonathan Rich is a senior from Alpharetta majoring in sociology

http://redandblack.com/2011/10/03/ha...-be-protected/

[BeerBaron]

It's about bloody time someone finally realized the simple fact that PC came right out of the communist doctrine. All forms of dictatorships what to shut people up, it's really very simple.