Hate Speech, Should It Be Regulated?

Hate Speech, Should it be Regulated?

Hate speech, what is it? The definition of hate speech, according to Mari J. Matsuda, author of “Assaultive Speech and Academic Freedom, is “…(a word of group of words) of which is to wound and degrade by asserting the inherent inferiority of a group” (151). In my own words hate speech is a humiliation and demeaning slur of words specifically used to disgrace a person for their race, religion, or sexual habits. There is now a controversy if hate speech should be regulated on college campuses or not. I have read a few articles with the author being either for or against regulating hate speech. My opinion is that yes, we should regulate hate speech on college campuses.

In three of the six articles I have read the author was for regulating hate speech. Those three are Mari J. Matsuda, Charles R. Lawrence III, author of “If he Hollers Let Him Go: Regulating Racist Speech on Campus (155),” and also Richard Delgado and David H. Yun, authors of “Pressure Valves and Bloodied Chickens: Paternalistic Objections to Hate Speech Regulation” (162). Matsuda believes that hate speech is assualtive against race and sexism (150). I also believe that hate speech is assualtive, especially when it is a racial or sexual comment. Lawrence believes that “minority-group students need this support of protection” (155). This I also agree with. Students should be able to walk throughout their campus without having to worry about what will be said to them that day. Delgado and Yun believe that the parenthetical view is the problem of hate speech. This is do not agree with. Although all three of these authors do agree on one thing, and that is regulating hate speech.

The other three authors that I read are against regulating hate speech. They are: Paul McMaster author of “Free Speech Versus Civil Discourse” (173), author Susan Gellman, wrote “Sticks and Stones Can Put You in Jail, But Can Words Increase Your Sentence?” (176), and also Henry Louis Gates Jr., author of “Lat Them Talk” (182). McMaster believes fully in the right of the first amendment and that it should not be gone against. He believes that if hate speech is regulated then the first amendment is violated. I do agree with McMaster on this one stand point but it is not enough to make me against regulation. Gellman asks three questions, those are: “What are the costs to society as a whole of hate speech laws (which she calls ‘ethnic intimidation laws’)? Are there unexpected dangers for ethnic minority groups in the hate speech laws designed to protect them? Do hate speech laws actually achieve their objectives of ‘combating bigotry and encouraging equal dignity’ ?” (176). My answer