The term hate speech is quite malleable. Subject to the current will of the majority/mob. What defines one anger from another?

Who defines the difference between opposite points of view and hating someone for their beliefs, religion or race? Hate speech is as vague a term as "hate crimes." Yet we have somehow accepted a forced decision to have such a term in our legal system.


What difference is it if you kill someone because of their politics, their race, their religion, or they fuhked your wife? Dead is dead and murder is simply wrong. There is no degree of it.

We seem comfortable with calling Jihadis a hate group, So the intentional programing of labeling White men in the same light is but a minor graduation of employing the term, hate. And, it is in a very close proximity to calling our nation's founders white supremist.

Oh wait, has that not already happened?

__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE

Sometimes, the various values that the US Constitution broadly embraces, are in direct conflict with each other in a particular situation. That is why courts sometimes have to hash it out: Which set of values deserves to prevail, in this particular instance?

__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007

the value that says if you advocate killing or harming someone or abridging them of their equality as a citizen, it's not free but the very opposite of freedom.

__________________
...

So Johnny Depp and Madonna should be Fined ... go to jail... be censored ... blocked from socail media... or public speaking... "canceled" from acting and singing?
what's the remedy?

or is it that if you say "I choose love" at the end of a threat it's to be ignored.

__________________
.
"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.
The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents."
..James Madison
.
"Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God."
..1 Peter 2:16

Let me give you an example of just what I mean:

In the landmark 1954 Supreme Court decision, Brown v. Board of Education, the values of equality (for black Americans) and liberty (for owners of various establishments) were in conflict.

The Court chose equality.

__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007

Brown vs Board of Ed was a case about separating children in school on the basis of race. The court ruled that separation as unconstitutional.

__________________
...

Brown reversed an earlier SCOTUS doctrine of separate but equal. Unlike today's cancel culture the Court did nothing to repress dissent from the prevailing opinion in Brown nor was there any suggestion the earlier decision ought to be relegated to a museum, purged.

Today's cancel culture means anyone if anyone in the proper identity group with the acceptable political background objects it's our civic duty to purge the source of the offense. That's the polar opposite of the first amendment.

__________________
If Democrats were confident their nominee actually received more than 80 million votes they wouldn't have more troops occupying Washington, DC than Lincoln had defending the city during the Civil War. Not Joe Biden, Kim Jung Biden.

Brown reversed an earlier SCOTUS doctrine of separate but equal. Unlike today's cancel culture the Court did nothing to repress dissent from the prevailing opinion in Brown nor was there any suggestion the earlier decision ought to be relegated to a museum, purged.

Today's cancel culture means anyone if anyone in the proper identity group with the acceptable political background objects it's our civic duty to purge the source of the offense. That's the polar opposite of the first amendment.

__________________
If Democrats were confident their nominee actually received more than 80 million votes they wouldn't have more troops occupying Washington, DC than Lincoln had defending the city during the Civil War. Not Joe Biden, Kim Jung Biden.

Brown essentially reversed an earlier SCOTUS ruling--Plessy v. Ferguson, in 1896--which established the doctrine of separate but equal. (One need not, here, get into the question of whether all-black schools were really "equal.")

The ruling that such separation was unconstitutional simply was the elevation of one constitutional value (i.e. equality) over another constitutional value (i.e. liberty).

Sometimes constitutional values--although both very desirable--may come into conflict with each other; and the Court must then decide which is to prevail, in a particular set of circumstances.

To point this out should really not be controversial.

__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007

Your statement about brainwashed may well be true. If so close to 80 million voters were so convinced to vote for a dementia old man and a whore. Biden/Harris.

__________________
I am going to hang a Batman Costume in my closet. .......... Just to screw with myself when I get alzheimer's.
sola gratia, sola fide, sola scriptura.

I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN, I AM A FREEMAN, THE DEMOCRATS WORST NIGHTMARE