What do you consider hate speech?

[The Straight Story]

Is it when folks broad brush a whole group based on the actions of some in a negative manner?

Is it when we enforce a stereotype of a group based on our experiences (ala cops, repubs, people of any religion, folks of a specific religion, et al)?

Is it when we spread fear of a certain person or persons or groups because we see them as a whole as 'bad' even when some (or many) within that group do not conform to our view of them?

I know many decent cops, Christians, Republicans (My bro-in-law is one, who voted for Obama), gun owners, etc and so on who don't fit the stereotype (and I thought those things were bad anyway, something I learned in 5th grade and I am 43) of said group.

As a liberal I believe that there are many good folks out there in this big tent, and just because they belong to group X and some in group X do wrong or believe Y does not make all in group X bad.

If we keep on focusing on the negative for a certain group are we no better than those on the rw who do the same - cherry pick events/ideals/etc to try and demonize a group while ignoring those many who have done good?

I am sure as hell no Catholic, but I can see that all are not bad and out to get me. I don't believe in Buddha as being the one way to the path of Enlightenment, but I won't tell those that do that they are just believing in some magical mystical being and that having a religion makes them evil because some having a religion have done so.

Own a gun? I don't, but those that do are not the problem to me - those that use a weapon, from their fists to whatever are the issue.

You are an American Indian and believe in Wonka Tonka, Spirits of the trees, etc - I don't see you as bad, and I won't make fun of you for your beliefs. I have mine, you have yours.

Atheist? Fine by me, I don't see any reason to drag out history of anyone who was atheist to make you all look bad.

I see people as standing on their own two feet - and when they do wrong, they are to blame. Not their faith, not their reason for doing it, but their actions. And I don't associate their own personal actions with those of the group.

As a liberal I see people as being responsible and intelligent enough to make their own choices for their own reasons. I don't blame whole groups usually (except when it comes to the RW, where we have a whole group en masse opposed to our ideals).

Why do we often rail against a group and then yell at those same groups for doing the same thing we are doing in regards to them??

Is it because maybe we feel the same, but we feel it is justified when we do it? How is it ever justified when we condemn a whole group for the actions of some in that same group?

Either we believe stereotypes are wrong or we don't.

And either we believe talking badly about a whole group is wrong over what some in that group have done is wrong or we don't.

We can't have it both ways.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

1. K&R and thank you ..............

That's a good, well-reasoned, and perfectly articulated piece of work you put there, Story, and I applaud you for it.

Today, here at DU, I found myself responding to someone who had claimed that "all lawyers are lying POS." As a member of the bar, I didn't like it. It's the worst kind of stereotyping. Imagine if someone said "all Democrats are lying POS" or, better, "all Jews are lying POS."

His response to to tell me to "chill." That I had "missed the joke."

That - and yes, he actually went down this road, which proves how far some people haven't come - some of his friends were actually :::: GASP ::::: lawyers.

If pushed, I'll bet he'd claim that some of his BEST friends were lawyers.

It was offensive, it was unfair, and it wasn't funny. I wonder how often that poster tells his lawyer friends that they're "all lying POS." I wonder if they all have a great big laugh at this kind of wit.

Anytime you condemn the group because of a few individuals, you're stereotyping, and that never ends well. You just miss so much.

Someone here recently claimed that any Christians who joined in on volunteer relief efforts of any kind were NOT to be trusted because their ultimate goal was proselytizing. I took that one on, too, and got no response.

It all starts, as the old saying goes, with one person relating to one other person, and going from there.

thank you for a timely and dead-right-on post.

:toast:

[napi21]

2. I think it's more in the way things are said than what words are used.

I know I can hear the same words from different people, and the tone or obvious attitude associated with each person's statement can mean completely different things.

[rwheeler31]

3. Why do they hate?

They do hate, and they are led to hate certain groups.

[rwheeler31]

4. I 'm sure at this point its all about money.

[imdjh]

5. I love hate speech

It let's you and the whole world know who and what you are dealing with. I also find that the people who are quickest and loudest in "opposing" hate speech will turn right around and say something showing just how hypocritical they can be.

[stray cat]

6. We have too much hate speech, depersonalization and stereotypes on both the left and the right

I see hate speech from both sides of the political isle - they just differ in the groups they malign.

[Obamanaut]

7. Does all this mean we should begin to see fewer expressions such

as "repukes are liars", "rethugs", "all repubs are illiterate", and so on? If there are in fact good ones (bro in law who voted for Obama for example), then by using such terms are we not guilty of what you described?