Summary of Nadine Strossen's HATE

By IRB Media

Please note: This is a companion version & not the original book. Book Preview:

#1 The term hate speech is used to describe a wide variety of controversial speech. It is typically used to condemn and silence expressions that the attackers dislike and want to suppress.

#2 Despite the varying definitions that have been adopted in hate speech laws, they all share two fundamental First Amendment flaws: they violate the cardinal viewpoint neutrality and emergency principles by permitting government to suppress speech solely because its message is disfavored, disturbing, or feared, and not because it directly causes imminent serious harm.

#3 However, some major proponents of hate speech laws have suggested that the laws should only be enforced against groups that have historically been subject to discrimination. This approach blatantly violates both free speech and equality principles.

#4 The equal rights movement has always depended on robust freedom of speech, particularly the viewpoint neutrality and emergency principles, which shelter the egalitarian ideas that many have considered harmful, hateful, and dangerous.

• Language: English
• Publisher: IRB Media
• Release date: May 6, 2022
• ISBN: 9798822505445

IRB Media

With IRB books, you can get the key takeaways and analysis of a book in 15 minutes. We read every chapter, identify the key takeaways and analyze them for your convenience.

Book preview

Insights on Nadine Strossen's HATE

Contents

Insights from Chapter 1

Insights from Chapter 2

Insights from Chapter 3

Insights from Chapter 4

Insights from Chapter 5

Insights from Chapter 6

Insights from Chapter 7

Insights from Chapter 8

Insights from Chapter 9

Insights from Chapter 10

Insights from Chapter 1

#1

The term hate speech is used to describe a wide variety of controversial speech. It is typically used to condemn and silence expressions that the attackers dislike and want to suppress.

#2

Despite the varying definitions that have been adopted in hate speech laws, they all share two fundamental First Amendment flaws: they violate the cardinal viewpoint neutrality and emergency principles by permitting government to suppress speech solely because its message is disfavored, disturbing, or feared, and not because it directly causes imminent serious harm.

#3

However, some major proponents of hate speech laws have suggested that the laws should only be enforced against groups that have historically been subject to discrimination. This approach blatantly violates both free speech and equality principles.

#4

The equal rights movement has always depended on robust freedom of speech, particularly the viewpoint neutrality and emergency principles, which shelter the egalitarian ideas that many have considered harmful, hateful, and dangerous.

#5

The same patterns can be seen in the movements for women’s rights and reproductive freedom. Their messages advocating law reform were viewed as disfavored, disturbing, or even hateful from the perspective of traditional religious and cultural