Does freedom of speech excuse preaching hate?

You really are terrified of the people you elect aren't you. Your automatic assumption is that as soon as someone is in power they 'take a cudgle to opinions they don't like,' explains why there's so many guns and paranoia your side of the pond.

I was in a rush and the term wouldn't come to my head - temple - no hate meant.

I believe that the punishment for such speech should be public vilification rather than criminal penalties.

Foofie wrote:

So, being realistic, you should not wake up a sleeping lion, in my opinion.

So a veiled threat just for suggesting you might want to consider something. How very democratic.

Foofie wrote:

So, being realistic, you should not wake up a sleeping lion, in my opinion.

So a veiled threat just for suggesting you might want to consider something. How very democratic.

Why don't you show me an actual example of how our legislation has been misused to stifle opposition.

On the whole, neither modern constitutional law nor international law consistently permits or consistently prohibits hate speech. However, within this framework, two distinct tendencies in the law's treatment of hate speech can be observed. (3) One can loosely identify a group of countries that prioritize freedom of speech over most countervailing interests, even when the speech is filled with hatred. This group of nations generally follows doctrines reminiscent of the constitutional law of the United States, so this approach will be referred to as the American position. The opposing view, shared by Germany, the member states of the Council of Europe, Canada, international law, and a minority of U.S. authors, (4) views hate-filled speech as forfeiting some or all of its free-speech protection. (5) This group of nations assigns a higher degree of protection to the dignity or equality of those who are attacked by hate speech than to the verbally aggressive speech used to attack them. Under this system, hate speech is not only unprotected, it is frequently punishable under criminal law, and individuals or groups who are the victims of hate speech frequently prevail in court.

The Court has also developed working rules for the task of case-specific balancing. Under these rules,

[Freedom] of opinion by no means always takes precedence over protection of personality.…Rather, where an expression of opinion must be viewed as a formal criminal insult or vilification, protection of personality routinely comes before freedom of expression (BVerfGE 66, 116 [151]; 82, 272 [281, 283 ff.]). Where expressions of opinion are linked to factual assertions, the protection merited can depend on the truth of the underlying factual assumption. If these assumptions have been proven untrue, freedom of expression will routinely yield to personality protection (cf. BVerfGE 61, 1 [8 ff.]; 85, 1 [17]). Otherwise, the issue is which legal interest deserves protection in that specific case. Even then, it must be recalled that a presumption in favour of free speech applies concerning issues of essential importance to the public (cf. BVerfGE 7, 198 [212]). (66)

I do not see any Americans proselytizing the abandonement of your sometimes clownish royalty.

Americans may value all sorts of political persuasians; however, the love of freedom of speech seems to be one of those values that you guys across the pond do not really understand. Like you guys may not understand the feelings of America to its wild west days.

Also, notice Americans seem to understand how different Europeans are and will remain.

God, why are Europeans so helpless, after two millenia of wreaking havoc around the world?

First because I am not familiar with current free speech issues in your country and second because the stifling effect of your hate speech legislation can't be observed.

You asked about US free speech laws and why don't we create something like your law.

but what about all the people who went to the Hollywood screening of this film?

I do not see any Americans proselytizing ....

On the other hand part of me wants to see Jones, who is another religious nut, brought to book for the American deaths he has indirectly caused.
This asshole knew well what would happen, knew well innocent people would die over this and yet did it for his own greedy reasons.
We all know what these Islamic headcases are like and he knew well he was going to get Americans killed.

So what do we do about him?.

I'm on the fence, I mean I all for free speech but I'm not sure how you deal with the likes of Terry Jones and others like him.

As we speak I'm hearing violence and mayhem are breaking out now tonight across the Muslim world. More American embassies are being attacked.

On the other hand part of me wants to see Jones, who is another religious nut, brought to book for the American deaths he has indirectly caused.

So what do we do about him?.

Maybe we could get Iran to sign a binding commitment to allow nuclear inspectors into its sites, and abide by all UN resolutions concerning nuclear production in exchange for him.

Orallie