Essay Database
Joe
Date Submitted: 10/31/2003 12:16:23
Resolved: That colleges and universities have a moral obligation to prohibit
the public expression of hate speech on their campuses.
Alexander, Larry. BANNING HATE SPEECH AND THE STICKS AND STONES DEFENSE. Constitutional Commentary. Spring, 1996
In addressing this issue, I, like most of the scholars, shall take "hate speech" to mean epithets conventionally understood to be insulting references to characteristics such as race, gender, nationality, ethnicity, religion, and sexual preference.
ibid.
First, it is insulting, and
Is this Essay helpful? Join now to read this particular paper
and access over 800,000 just like this GET BETTER GRADES
and access over 800,000 just like this GET BETTER GRADES
finds Cox v. New Hampshire [1941], Poulos
v. New Hampshire [1953], Wooley v. Maynard [1977--this is the
case about the "Live Free or Die" license plates], etc.) Weird.
2) Major point: Chaplinsky was a unanimous 1942 decision, but
the court began eroding it almost before the ink was dry. There
have been any number of subsequent decisions which all but killed
the so-called "fighting words" doctrine. Take a look at Cohen
v. California [1971], for instance, or Gooding v. Wil
Need a custom written paper? Let our professional writers save your time.