Should Hate Speech Cost?
Today is Monday, 8 November 2010.
“Move along folks; nothin’ to see”.
Having given the victims of terroristic homophobes their 15 minutes due, the capitalist media (CM) is moving on.
Of course, the CM prefers the far-less-incendiary-and-accurate term, “bullying”.
Let’s cut to the chase, shall we? I’ll stipulate, as lawyers say, that I’ve already received at least one outraged comment. “There HH goes again! Trampling on the Sacred and Immutable American Language, redefining words, using “terror” to mean something other than A-rabs blowing US up.”
As I’ve stated afore, “terror” should be viewed as a spectrum of malignant activities, not merely as whose ox is gored, which leads only to the dead end of competing fiefdoms of proprietary victimhood.
As right-wingers are fond of prating, “Ideas have consequences”. Indeed. Whether it’s “Faggots are damned by God!”, or “Infidels are damned by Allah!”, or “Non-Christians are damned by Jesus!”, or “Gooks are damned by Uncle Sam!”, or “Kikes are damned by the White Gentile Race!”, etc.
Homophobic speech is hate speech, an assault on humanity and any decent god or gods there may be, and those with such ideas are welcome to just up-and-move to North Korea, where they really go in for that sort of thing.
When homophobic hate speech is based on passages in the Bible which are put forth as calling for the murder of homosexuals, there is a clear question whether this meets the legal test for being a prohibited incitement to action. Let bigots mutter their filth in the cesspools of their own minds, but they shouldn’t spew forth and encourage violence by others.
Of course, the use of such passages by “Christian” preachers shows what hypocrites and cowards they are, since they don’t have the courage to carry out the judgment they claim their “God” demands. They do, however, create the atmospheres which encourage others to homophobic violence.
Would they spew their hate, if they knew they would spend, say, a decade in prison for doing so? I think not.
“Move along folks; nothin’ to see”.
Having given the victims of terroristic homophobes their 15 minutes due, the capitalist media (CM) is moving on.
Of course, the CM prefers the far-less-incendiary-and-accurate term, “bullying”.
Let’s cut to the chase, shall we? I’ll stipulate, as lawyers say, that I’ve already received at least one outraged comment. “There HH goes again! Trampling on the Sacred and Immutable American Language, redefining words, using “terror” to mean something other than A-rabs blowing US up.”
As I’ve stated afore, “terror” should be viewed as a spectrum of malignant activities, not merely as whose ox is gored, which leads only to the dead end of competing fiefdoms of proprietary victimhood.
As right-wingers are fond of prating, “Ideas have consequences”. Indeed. Whether it’s “Faggots are damned by God!”, or “Infidels are damned by Allah!”, or “Non-Christians are damned by Jesus!”, or “Gooks are damned by Uncle Sam!”, or “Kikes are damned by the White Gentile Race!”, etc.
Homophobic speech is hate speech, an assault on humanity and any decent god or gods there may be, and those with such ideas are welcome to just up-and-move to North Korea, where they really go in for that sort of thing.
When homophobic hate speech is based on passages in the Bible which are put forth as calling for the murder of homosexuals, there is a clear question whether this meets the legal test for being a prohibited incitement to action. Let bigots mutter their filth in the cesspools of their own minds, but they shouldn’t spew forth and encourage violence by others.
Of course, the use of such passages by “Christian” preachers shows what hypocrites and cowards they are, since they don’t have the courage to carry out the judgment they claim their “God” demands. They do, however, create the atmospheres which encourage others to homophobic violence.
Would they spew their hate, if they knew they would spend, say, a decade in prison for doing so? I think not.
posted by HH at 3:28 PM
10 Comments:
Are you trying to bait the "move to (name the country)" crowd with the "just up and move to North Korea" comment."
I suspect the bitter irony of that remark will pass through as un-noticed as an x-ray.
Good post to Seeing Red by WDR BTW.
HH... Don't you know that there is biblical authority for some hate-speech? God hates figs (Mark 11: 12-14). Case closed; next case.
Facts are like opinions, only they're true.
Jesus curses a fig tree. A literal interpretation rather than a parable. Religious interpretations are like opinions, only they're beliefs.
Everybody needs to believe in something. I believe I'll have another beer.
A perplexing passage. Jesus wants figs, but it's not fig season, and, not being a Roman plutocrat, has no access to figs flown in from Chile. Instead of making figs magically appear on the tree, JC curses the tree.
Narcissistic. My sympathies are with the tree.
My sarcasm was lost - damn. My little joke fell flat (The ignorant slogan "God Hates Fags" becomes "God Hates Figs" - with biblical citation, no less...). Well, so much for my poor attempt to bring a little ray of sunshine into the lives of others.
No, you didn't fail. Mrs. HH and I had fine guffaws out of the "Fags"/Figs cleverness. But then, me being me, I had to wonder why Jesus would go all whupass on a tree out of season. (Did he sent a lot of dishes back in taverns?) Why didn't he spend those precious moments of his life, that he'd never get back, warning the future about Newt Gingrich, or some such?
My bad and I also wondered. Apologies for reading it as unintended irony. I tend to see things through the filters of a very hidebound fundamentalist Oklahoma upbringing. I can't seem to escape it as every home that I have had in over a half century as been in the reddest of red areas. My current abode is within sight of Sarah Palin's in an area of Alaska that is if anything, redder than Oklahoma.
FWIW, when I googled the Biblical passage, I found an interesting interpretation of the parable, from of all places, what appears to be an atheist website that appeared to be more kindly insightful of the passage than I would have imagined.
Sign me red-faced and appreciative of the intended irony.
HH writes: “I’ll stipulate, as lawyers say, that I’ve already received at least one outraged comment. ‘There HH goes again! Trampling on the Sacred and Immutable American Language, redefining words, using ‘terror‘ to mean something other than A-rabs blowing US up.”
WHERE is the outraged comment? I have scanned the Archives through a number of previous posts and comments (by HH and others) for a significant period of time and can find no such comment. Frankly, the majority of outraged, sarcastic comments, come primarily from HH.
So, HH, please point out this comment. I would appreciate being able to read it in its entirety.
To rtr and to whom it may concern:
Poor Oklahoma. It is sorely vilified in this blog time and again. The next thing you know, someone is going to propose it be mightily smote by God himself for be "such a dumb ass place." Please lay off. Not all Oklahomans are gun toting red necks who have no tolerance for those who do not subscribe to their way of life.
You're right, okie, not all Oklahomans are intolerant boobs, but you'd never know it from the State Questions on our ballot or the majority of our elected representatives.
I'm am continually shocked by the profound ignorance of our electorate. I personally have any number of okie friends who are intelligent, compassionate people. Now if we could only master the art of public persuasion.
Post a Comment
<< Home