"The ACLU has provided legal support to various factions of the KKK in defense of their First Amendment rights to hold public rallies, parades, and marches, and their right to field political candidates." In your opinion, does the KKK have a right to Freedom of Expression and Speech under the American Constitution? What are your thoughts on similar organizations' right to assemble? Have you ever witnessed a public KKK assembly in your library, or community? Please feel free to express your views and opinions here.
Freedom of speech is just that. I may not support what they say or stand for but I will sure as hell defend their right to say it...
Your KKK is similar, though a much darker and sinister version of our BNP (British National Party) – a necessary evil. Freedom of speech and right to protest is an integral part of Democratic process and we denounce those who deprive others of allowing this practice. The opinion and ignorance of these disturbed individuals who seriously believe that this doctrine is sane and acceptable, as abhorrent though it is has, I’m afraid to be endured. For though we totally disagree with their views, let us not forget they have a right to do so (and I’d much rather they did so openly than covertly). Only by education can we hope to champion the philosophies that we hold dear. We have a responsibility to ensure that there is an equal if not greater voice for equality, justice, opportunity virtue and honour. < Peace + Love ~ Save the Planet >
the awful things they say are protected by legal rights and we need education, and understanding to help stop the cycle of hate. You cant take away their rights, but we can hope to change the hearts and minds of the new generation.
Of course they should have the right to free speech Just because a lot of people don't like their message doesnt mean it should be censored
Not only do I say yes, but I think it's vital that they have free speech. They may not be on the same thought-wave as the majority of america, but does that mean we should censor them? If that happens, who gets censored next? Does this lead to an America where the only thing acceptable is what the government tells you?
if they can't say ****** then i can't say redneck. although it is probably more constructive to just ignore them since giving them attention is what they want.
Up until the point when it becomes incitement to violence. But yeah, by censoring them you simply give them the ability to declare themselves free speech martyrs, which is generally what happens with other fascist groups.
Yes, so long as I have to right to ignore them. And I've never seen a rally, or heard of one. The Klan's really declined, with only a couple thousand members, or that's what I thought.
Under US law, the KKK does have the right to free speech. But the US constitution was written hundreds of years ago by white supremacist slave owners. In Canada, the KKK does not have free speech because hate speech takes away other guaranteed rights and freedoms in the Canadian constitution. But it was written less than 30 years ago by socially conscious, intelligent, liberal politicians. I think it's fair to sacrifice this kind of free speech in order to ensure minority rights. So, I'd have to say that (under your laws) the KKK has the right to free speech, but ethically, they should not have the right to free speech.
Denying those in the Klu Klux Klan the ability to express their opinions would create a bad precedent. It might be used to prohibit the publication of books like The Bell Curve, by Charles Murray. The best way to deal with the arguments of the KKK, or the American Nazi Party is by rational rebuttal. Also, I rather like the American Communist Party. I would not want the CPUSA to be denied the right to dissent.
As far as I'm concerned the KKK has no rights.The ACLU seems to always defend scumbags in most cases,once in a while they have a valid case,but overall the ACLU is terrible.
Yes, Definitely. However....Although it's tricky to enforce, I tent to think inciting violence should be illegal and prosecuted. Not preemptively, but if specific people are targeted and encouraged to commit a specific violent act which they do commit, the inciter should be prosecuted. (I'm trying to be careful. I don't mean if some crazy kid reads some hate speech and kills someone, the author should be prosecuted. But, if someone specifically targets someone and convinces them to commit a violent act, they should take some responsibility.) Maybe this is too fine a line.....could it be legislated in a safe way...maybe not. I could be convinced I'm wrong on this. I also am thinking that it'd be bad to, for example, allow the KKK to have a party or parade near a polling place in a black neighborhood on election day. I think if the KKK is using it's right to gather and demonstrate as a way to, for example, intimidate voters, that might be beyond free speech. It's similar to not allowing pro-forced-gestation activists (aka anti-abortion) to demonstrate too close to the door of a planned parenthood clinic. I think I agree with that.....but I can see where it's problematic too.
In the UK it's illegal to incite racial hatred and violence. I believe in free speech, however a total absence of moderation is not a guarantor of free speech if it allows certain groups to oppress the rights of others. Allowing neo-Nazi groups to incite racial hatred hinders the rights of other ethnic groups to speak out or organise. As J.S Mill, the founding father of modern liberalism and most significant proponent of free speech, cautioned: the will of the people often translates as the will of the majority at the expense of minorities....
Just to play devils advocate here, how does a neo-Nazi rally hinder the rights of other ethnic groups to speak out or organize? Is the rally somehow physically keeping them from doing so?