[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Free speech ends where it incites violence.

When the Nazis Came to Skokie: Freedom for Speech We Hate





The New York Times looks at how the issue and the ACLU are under fire again.

After Backing Alt-Right in Charlottesville, A.C.L.U. Wrestles With Its Role

Do you agree with the ACLU in this case? Should free speech protections extend to Nazis carrying rifles and waving swastika flags in front of a synagogue so long as they stop short of actually committing or inciting violence?

How is the above scenario any different than KKK members burning crosses in front of black churches or the homes of African Americans, an act the Supreme Court ruled in 2003 is not protected speech?

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2003/04/0...s-burning.html

The Supreme Court upheld a Virginia statute yesterday that makes it illegal for Ku Klux Klansmen and others to burn crosses. The case was a difficult one, forcing the court to weigh the free-expression rights of those who burn crosses against the right of their victims not to be physically intimidated and threatened with harm.

I'm not an ACLU lawyer or Supreme Court justice, but those two scenarios seem identical to me other than the group being targeted. If anything, chanting Nazi slogans outside a synagogue while brandishing firearms is even more physically intimidating to the victims of the hatred than setting a cross on fire and running away.