system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Hate Speech Should Be Legal

I know that this topic has been covered before, but I've found myself lacking the answers I seek. I apologize in advance if anyone finds this topic redundant.

​

Hate speech is defined as "speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity."

​

1. I find this definition to be far too vague. By this definition, criticizing scientologists for stealing people's money could be considered hate speech. As could discussing biological differences between men and women.
2.  Banning hate speech would only entrench hateful people in their views. As soon as someone is silenced or targeted for their views, they are now the victims, which gives their views legitimacy. If a white supremacist is punished for speaking his mind, then he would see this as evidence of minorities taking away the white's rightful place as superior in society and further incite them to champion the white supremacy movement. If the goal is to create safe spaces, then banning hate speech is not the way to do it.
gpt
>I find this definition to be far too vague.

Which is why the definition is extended and interpreted through specific legislation, precedent, and established legal principles.

>As soon as someone is silenced or targeted for their views, they are now the victims,

They may perceive themselves to be victims, but if what's being silenced is "Bring back lynching N-words", they're definitely not the actual victims.

>which gives their views legitimacy.

In what way does telling someone not to say something make that view more legitimate? Doesn't social censure generally correlate with ideas that are stupid and hateful?

>If a white supremacist is punished for speaking his mind, then he would see this as evidence of minorities taking away the white's rightful place as superior in society

Who cares what happens to someone's feeling that their superior position in society is owed to them?

>If the goal is to create safe spaces, then banning hate speech is not the way to do it.

The goal is to create spaces safe enough that people feel they can live their lives and advocate for their interests. It seems like taking harsher measures against racially-based threats could easily be part of achieving that.