SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: haqihana who wrote (134813)4/2/2001 7:10:04 PM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
>Verbally harassing them at
every opportunity is just fine with me. <

'. . . it is well understood that the right of free speech is not absolute at all times and under all circumstances. There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited
classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any Constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene,
the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or 'fighting' words-those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.
It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are [408 U.S. 901 , 904] of such slight social value as a step to
truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality. 'Resort to epithets or personal abuse is
not in any proper sense communication of information or opinion safeguarded by the Constitution, and its punishment as a criminal act would raise no question
under that instrument.' Cantwell v. Connecticut,
310 U.S. 296 , 309-310, 906.' 315 U.S., at 571 -572. (Footnotes omitted.)



To: haqihana who wrote (134813)4/2/2001 7:23:25 PM
From: Kevin Rose  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769667
 
Well, be careful. Some states have laws against this if you go too far; they are aptly called 'hate crimes'.