Post Classifieds

Court decision wrongly condones hate speech

By Angelica Rodriguez
On October 10, 2012

 

"In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel. Defeat
jihad."
 
These words are splashed all over ten Metropolitan Transit Authority subway stations after a judge
ruled in favor of the campaign's creator, Pamela Geller, and the organization she runs called "Stop!
Islamization of America."
 
She believes Islam is rooted in evil, and her followers have said things such as "The Muslims [violate]
little girls."
 
Her group has been classified as a "hate group" by the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern
Poverty Law Center.
 
That didn't stop her from suing the New York City transportation system after it rejected her ads on the
basis of their language. She claimed the rejection violated her First Amendment right to free speech.
 
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer agreed, calling the 18 words repeated above "core political speech."
 
But what kind of political speech uses the comparison of "savage" to "civilized" to describe a group of
people? Isn't that demeaning and likely to incite some sort of uproar? That's what many define as hate
speech, and it's a highly contested issue when it comes to First Amendment rights.
 
Some argue that hate speech is subjective, and as such it should be protected. Others say that it can
incite violence and therefore should be excluded from the tenets of free speech.
 
This could certainly be classified as hate speech simply because it targets an implied group of people,
even if they aren't named. You could be utterly unconcerned with the details of the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict and still know the group of people Geller wants us to defend Israel against.
 
Consequently, you can draw the conclusion that said group should be seen as subhuman, uncivilized
and lesser than. That's a personal attack with no evidence to support it, and it also overlooks any
atrocities that Israel may have itself committed in the conflict that could be seen as "uncivilized."
 
Historically speaking, courts have ruled in favor of hate speech's protection. Think back to 2011, when
the Supreme Court decided that the Westboro Baptist Church was within its rights when it picketed
the funeral of a Marine who died in Iraq, saying that the group was commenting on a "matter of public
concern." The group held signs saying, "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "[Homosexual] sin = 9/11."
 
There have been similar rulings in 2003 with Virginia v. Black, 1993 with Wisconsin v. Mitchell, and
1988 with Hustler Magazine v. Falwell (in which Hustler printed a parody liquor ad implying the Rev.
Jerry Falwell's first sexual experience was with his mother).
 
Does the fact the Supreme Court says you can say hateful things as long as you follow the basic rules
change the fact that you've targeted a person or group of people and attacked them?
 
I think not. And I think we all need to step back and look at the situation before we say, "We can say
whatever we want, this is America."
 
It's true that no matter what you say, there's going to be someone out there who doesn't like it. But we
can all recognize when someone's been attacked using false information and a healthy degree of hatred.
 
This is the situation with Geller's ads, and it should not be allowed. Just consider the word "savage,"
used by Europeans to describe Native Americans when they came to North America for the first time.
 
Something that oppressive and disgustingly ethnocentric is bound to incite anger in the group to which
you refer, and it's definitely not any part of intelligent political rhetoric.
 
The posters have prompted plenty of retaliation already, from Post-it notes saying, "this is hate speech"
to open condemnation from rabbis, to Egyptian-American activist Mona Eltahawy spray-painting over
them (and being arrested for it).
 
The backlash could escalate, but right now it's at least refreshing to see people reacting to them and
exercising their own First Amendment rights in a more constructive manner. That's the only thing
anyone can do at this point to try and stifle this voice of hatred.
 
Angelica Rodriguez can be reached by email at rodriguez.record@live.com.

Get Top Stories Delivered Weekly

Recent The Record News Articles

Discuss This Article

GET TOP STORIES DELIVERED WEEKLY

FOLLOW OUR NEWSPAPER

Log In

or Create an account

Employers & Housing Providers

Employers can list job opportunities for students

Post a Job

Housing Providers can list available housing

Post Housing

Log In

Forgot your password?

Your new password has been sent to your email!

Logout Successful!

Please Select Your College/University:

You just missed it! This listing has been filled.

Post your own housing listing on Uloop and have students reach out to you!

Upload An Image

Please select an image to upload
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format
OR
Provide URL where image can be downloaded
Note: must be in .png, .gif or .jpg format