Unlike Others, U.S. Defends Freedom to Offend in Speech

[groovedaddy]

VANCOUVER, British Columbia — A couple of years ago, a Canadian magazine published an article arguing that the rise of Islam threatened Western values. The article’s tone was mocking and biting, but it said nothing that conservative magazines and blogs in the United States do not say every day without fear of legal reprisal.

Things are different here. The magazine is on trial.

Two members of the Canadian Islamic Congress say the magazine, Maclean’s, Canada’s leading newsweekly, violated a provincial hate speech law by stirring up hatred against Muslims. They say the magazine should be forbidden from saying similar things, forced to publish a rebuttal and made to compensate Muslims for injuring their “dignity, feelings and self-respect.”

The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, which held five days of hearings on those questions here last week, will soon rule on whether Maclean’s violated the law. As spectators lined up for the afternoon session last week, an argument broke out.

“It’s hate speech!” yelled one man.

“It’s free speech!” yelled another.

In the United States, that debate has been settled. Under the First Amendment, newspapers and magazines can say what they like about minorities and religions — even false, provocative or hateful things — without legal consequence.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/12hate.html?th=&adxnnl=1&emc=th&adxnnlx=1213286758-rq4bixjvpvlKluspa+w3gA

[Igel]

1. I found this to be one of the more interesting op-ed pieces

I've seen for a while, and one that reverses the usual "if everybody else is doing it, we should, too--no American exceptionalism here" routine. Instead it's a "don't join the herd" article.

And yet, no other comments, in over 6 hours, for an article about a fundamental right.

[BridgeTheGap]

3. I came to the conclusion a while back, while fighting the Patriot Act

that most Americans - 1. Don't have a clue about what their rights are. 2. Don't really give a shit about them when they do know.
DU readers/writers tend to have a much higher awareness than the population at-large. Maybe we're getting a little shell shocked?

[tom_paine]

2. Well now. that's a bit surprising to know about. Free Canada has a hole in their freedom

Nobody's perfect, and I can see why these nations do that sort of thing, though I disagree with it.

OTOH, here's a puzzler: Would you trade our Free Speech Rights for canada's if it also meant you left a Big Three Surveillance State (Amerika, Russia & China) for Free Canada, with it's rating as one of the least surveilled nations with the some of the highest consitutional protections inthe world.

That's a toughie. Even all things being equal and ignoring my affinity for my home country, no matter what evil it embraces (always a member of the home team, even if the coaches are evil and the team is bankrupt and they've planted surveillance devices in every fan's seat).

Still...a toughie, especially aftre reading this article.