3 ms·

I think his main point is that while this country has risen above racial denigration and there are consequences to racial hate speech, there aren't any to relig

I think his main point is that while this country has risen above racial denigration and there are consequences to racial hate speech, there aren't any to religious hate speech. Also, free speech is restricted if it is directed to lead to "imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action" (Brandenburg v. Ohio)[1]. [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech#United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech#United_States

diego_moita 14y ago
> free speech is restricted Where I live (Brazil) there are, regrettably, a lot more restrictions to free speech than in the U.S.. But I don't think one error is justification for another one. > free speech is restricted if it is directed to lead to "imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action" Ok, I can accept this. But I don't understand how mocking a religion leads to "imminent lawless action".