re: #25 Russkilitlover

Does inciting violence need to be a direct call for action or applied after action has taken place? Ranting hateful stuff is ranting. Inciting violence must lead to action, mustn’t it? Or else it’s just speech.

Careful, this leads us very close to the notion some have advanced regarding the expansion of hate crime laws to include gays. What happens when Rev. Smith preaches against homosexuality from the pulpit and then one of the congregants, Mr. Jones, goes out and commits an act of violence against one of those engaged in the sin Rev. Jones condemned? Some would argue that Rev. Jones had engaged in incitement of a hate crime, which would itself be criminal.

I despise anti-Semites — but do we want to make it illegal for them to speak because of what their words might lead someone to feel or believe — or do, even if there is no direct advocacy of violence? Is it not better to let such folks speak, and to meet their hatred with strident condemnation instead?