Advocates call the law a necessary control on hate speech in an age where the Internet makes the spread of messages easier and faster. Opponents say it's censorship and has no place in a free society.





Not only are we divided on whether it should be legal, we are divided on what it should be.

Is it hate speech to call other races subhumans, but legal to note in a scientific paper that there IQ differences [news-medical.net] between [wikipedia.org] races [halfsigma.com], moral evolutionary differences [edge.org], or even that statistically, crime is not distributed evenly [colorofcrime.com] between all groups?

Half of scientists say race doesn't exist [pbs.org], the others [goodrumj.com] keep quiet.

The bigger issue here is what we're obscuring the pursuit of truth with all sorts of social pretense. Let's look at the facts and keep emotion (true hate speech) and censorship out of the debate.