Tennessee Free Speech Bill Signed Into Law

[Martymark]

do you think it should be okay for someone to shout "bomb" in a crowded building?

That and directly telling people to murder someone are just about the only thing not protected by as free speech by the first amendment.

Also, the court case where that argument was used was in support of jailing anyone who spoke out against drafting people into the army against their will. I suppose that kind of sedition is the "hate speech" you want banned right?

[Deleted]

No, it doesn't.

Yes, it does - How do you think Title nine is enforced?

Let's extend your logic to other situations. The state gives Jim a section 8 housing voucher, and he goes and rents a house. The KKK wants to hold a rally on Jim's lawn, can he not tell them to fuck off because the state pays for some of his housing?

If the state made section 8 housing contingent on complying with such a request yes - You know they do that to criminals right?

Accepting tax dollars does not mean the state controls, or is given the authority over, any particular thing. Even if they did, this isn't a First Amendment issue, because the university didn't say "You can't say that" they said "You can't say that on this particular date and time because it's likely to cause a riot." No one's speech was infringed, the First Amendment doesn't provide you with protections to ensure your speech has an audience. Be glad it doesn't.

I don't think you understand, this law either pertains to universities that are state run, or it pertains to universities that need state funding, and the state just made it so compliance is required for funding.

- - - Updated - - -

But the state has consistently cut funding to the school so they are not able to provide ample security and logistics when big named alt right speakers try to come.

The state has clearly told them that this is not something that they can prioritize away.

There is no ban on their views since lesser known names have given speeches with no problems because they don't garner the same kind of controversy. Unless the state is going to provide special funding for this it's an idiotic law

There is absolutely no need to provide special funding - arrest, prosecute, and dispel rioters.

[Draco-Onis]

The state has clearly told them that this is not something that they can prioritize away.

There is absolutely no need to provide special funding - arrest, prosecute, and dispel rioters.

Security, barriers and logistics to do that costs money, I am not sure why I have to spell this out. The regular alt right speakers don't have a big enough name to require any of that same goes for the regular speakers, the university makes nothing off this.

[Realitytrembles]

That and directly telling people to murder someone are just about the only thing not protected by as free speech by the first amendment.

Also, the court case where that argument was used was in support of jailing anyone who spoke out against drafting people into the army against their will. I suppose that kind of sedition is the "hate speech" you want banned right?

Exactly.

Direct & credible death threats, and imminent incitement to riot (of which shouting "fire" or "bomb" in a crowded space is a type) are the only things that should be banned.

People who fold at being insulted/namecalling are moral & philosophical cowards.

[ipaq]

Who is "they" exactly?

IF a University is receiving public dollars, they should be willing to host speakers that appeal to students of various ideologies, from communists, to Anarcho-capitalists.

Not all students are leftists and universities should be encouraging students to host speakers that stimulate debate and critical thinking.

Hate speech is not free speech, its hate speech.

Those laws, as explained but the leaked emails between some GOP talking heads, are too allow white supremacists and other "deplorable" lobbies to have a platform to preached their ideology.

Enjoy.

[Frenegade42]

A red state passing legislation for the benefit of neo-nazis. Who would have thunk it.

Yep, I'll take up that hyperbole. Communists, Neo-Nazis, full blown Nazis, Old Fashioned Racists, White Supremecists, Anarchists, Hippys, Cultists, Pro-Lifers, Pro-Choicers, Liberals, Conservatives, Peaceniks and Warhawks. I want to hear them all. I may agree with many of the positions offered or I may disagree and solidify my beliefs.

What do YOU have to be afraid of?

[Vorkreist]

No such thing as alt Left.

BLM, antifa or feminists are like Nazis to you?

QUOTE=Elba;48526451]No such thing as alt Left.

BLM, antifa or feminists are like Nazis to you?[/QUOTE]

Antifa commies are the same as Nazis.

[Kubaal]

Ban them all, or accept them all...

/Equality (Or is this only a factor when its beneficial to your ideology?)

[Martymark]

Hate speech is not free speech, its hate speech.

Maybe I don't understand what "hate speech" is, as it I just think of it as "speech I don't like". Could you tell me what you think it is?

[Psilar]

This is where you are so horribly wrong.

Rights do not exist because you exist. A right, in order to exist, must be conveyed upon by the sole power that can TAKE IT FROM YOU. You can profess that you have the freedom of speech, but how much firmness of resolve does that right have when the government, who is arguably more powerful than you, simply jails you for challenging them? What weight does your right carry?

You are foolish to think that just because you exist, you entitled to some abstract concept created by an authority who can take it from you on a whim. You have no rights except for those deemed accessible by the government and only because they have the power to override that right should they get it into their heads to do so.

Nothing short of violence and insurrection against a tyrannical system will assure you any measure of rights you've diluted yourself into believing you possess by virtue of a heartbeat and what then, when you have the power, you will say to the people, "I give you the right to speak as you so please" and you will afford them this right until it threatens to take that power from you.

But, please, feel free to assume that your rights are yours because you exist.

This is where you're wrong. People existed before government. People create the government. People make up the government. People can choose to forfeit their rights through government.

You don't give people rights you give people privileges.

No where did I say I think we're following the Constitution. No where did I say it was easy. The founding fathers knew that in order to keep it the way they created it, would be through perseverance and fortitude and potentially blood. The tree of liberty must be fed with blood. Their words, not mine.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe I don't understand what "hate speech" is, as it I just think of it as "speech I don't like". Could you tell me what you think it is?

That's exactly what it is. It's a boundless and limitless scope which is for people that must....have a fetish for ball gags.

- - - Updated - - -

Hate speech is not free speech, its hate speech.

Those laws, as explained but the leaked emails between some GOP talking heads, are too allow white supremacists and other "deplorable" lobbies to have a platform to preached their ideology.

Enjoy.

Hate speech is free speech. It comes with a few caveats. You can't directly threaten someone and you can't lie about someone. You're incredibly naive to think that we're all just only going to spew out rainbows and cupcakes forever because of feels. This is the most absurd notion going around today. You can't make people like you.

Anyone who wants to limit free speech or hate speech means that you want to kill anyone who says something that you don't like. You are a fascist.

[Tinykong]

Yes, it does - How do you think Title nine is enforced?

Title IX is a special law which expressly states you can't exclude people from education or sports programs.

Why do you think they required a special law? Because receiving tax dollars does not mean the government can tell you what to do.

If the state made section 8 housing contingent on complying with such a request yes - You know they do that to criminals right?

So you agree, it requires special legal definition to grant the government this kind of power, because it isn't unilateral.

I don't think you understand, this law either pertains to universities that are state run, or it pertains to universities that need state funding, and the state just made it so compliance is required for funding.

I understand what happened, and why it will be overturned.

[Deleted]

Title IX is a special law which expressly states you can't exclude people from education or sports programs.

And compliance is enforced by making federal dollars contingent on accepting said rules.

So you agree, it requires special legal definition to grant the government this kind of power, because it isn't unilateral.

This is a thread about how the state of Tennessee made a " special legal definition" (the word you should have used is requirement) of compliance with their rules, regarding free speech.

I understand what happened, and why it will be overturned.

No it wont - it might make for a cumbersome law, but there is no grounds what so ever for 'overturning' it -

[Logwyn]

Fucking SJWs! Telling a business who they can and can't let onto their premises!

So we should allow business owners to buy axe handles to keep people from their stores?

[satimy]

Hate speech is not free speech, its hate speech.

Those laws, as explained but the leaked emails between some GOP talking heads, are too allow white supremacists and other "deplorable" lobbies to have a platform to preached their ideology.

Enjoy.

Hate speech is a made up European term, it has 0 meaning in America

[Elegiac]

Hate speech is a made up European term, it has 0 meaning in America

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauharnais_v._Illinois

Stop lying. Hate speech has been a legal concept in the US since the 40s.

[satimy]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beauharnais_v._Illinois

Stop lying. Hate speech has been a legal concept in the US since the 40s.

Nope you’re blatantly wrong, move to Europe or South America if you enjoy oppressive anti free speech laws

[Machismo]

I'm all for any law that improves freedom of speech. Government-backed institutions should not be restricting speech, or for that matter, determining whose speech is more important. If this is public space, let people speak. That does not mean you are obligated to increase security, or give special considerations for any contingencies. Let them speak, the rest is up to those who are exercising their speech.

On that note, we should also be able to walk around naked or display pornography in those exact same spaces. In essence, attempting to silence Nazis on public grounds is no different than other obscenity laws, so they should all be removed. Consistency is a wonderful thing.

[Elegiac]

Nope you’re blatantly wrong

Again, stop lying. Hate speech is not a protected exception to the First Amendment, but the fact there is a ruling stating such demonstrates that it is a concept that exists within the American legal system and has for decades.

I'd also like to point out that most western democracies have hate speech legislation; the US is the exception, not the norm. But hey, continue living in your right wing bubble wherein everywhere but the US is 'oppressive'.

[BuckSparkles]

I'd also like to point out that most western democracies have hate speech legislation; the US is the exception, not the norm. But hey, continue living in your right wing bubble wherein everywhere but the US is 'oppressive'.

I am glad America values free speech more than our western allies.

[Daelak]

Which is why referring to the US as a "Free Country" is still more correct than not.

Lol, yeah that Western Europe, oppressive police state.