You surely know the "boundary" is important. Was the pogrom-like treatment of jews in NYC free speech? Is chanting for death to jews free speech? If I spit on a cop, is it free speech? If I terrorize certain groups with suggestions of violence is it free speech? Just asking.
You surely know the "boundary" is important. Was the pogrom-like treatment of jews in NYC free speech? Is chanting for death to jews free speech? If I spit on a cop, is it free speech? If I terrorize certain groups with suggestions of violence is it free speech? Just asking.
"Pogrom-like treatment"? Who was murdered, exiled, or sent to a concentration camp in NYC during the demonstrations?
"Chanting for the death of Jews" is ugly, and says quite a bit about those benighted Americans who do it, but it's permissible under the First Amendment, as the once-useful ACLU argued many years ago in Skokie, IL.
Spitting on cops is also a "speech act" of a sort, though if you want to get technical about it, it might be considered "assault" if you want to stretch the definition.
"Suggestions" of violence are not actual violence, obviously. Direct threats of violence are another matter, and don't fall under the protection of the First Amendment (never mind the "crowded theater" bullshit that's always taken out of context).
Speech is either free or it isn't. The level of one's offense does not change the principle and, in fact, the grosser the offense the greater the protection required, since offense is a purely subjective response to some irritant. So-called "hate speech" is a bad idea that has gained far too much traction, giving leverage to those who would throttle political discussions.
I hate Hamas probably as much as you do and, viscerally and emotionally, I'd like to see them all killed, but so what? I also see that it's easy for the pro-Israel faction to conflate criticisms of Israel's foreign policy with "antisemitism" since Jewish identity is often deliberately mixed together with the nation's politics to deflect reasonable political criticisms.
You surely know the "boundary" is important. Was the pogrom-like treatment of jews in NYC free speech? Is chanting for death to jews free speech? If I spit on a cop, is it free speech? If I terrorize certain groups with suggestions of violence is it free speech? Just asking.
"Pogrom-like treatment"? Who was murdered, exiled, or sent to a concentration camp in NYC during the demonstrations?
"Chanting for the death of Jews" is ugly, and says quite a bit about those benighted Americans who do it, but it's permissible under the First Amendment, as the once-useful ACLU argued many years ago in Skokie, IL.
Spitting on cops is also a "speech act" of a sort, though if you want to get technical about it, it might be considered "assault" if you want to stretch the definition.
"Suggestions" of violence are not actual violence, obviously. Direct threats of violence are another matter, and don't fall under the protection of the First Amendment (never mind the "crowded theater" bullshit that's always taken out of context).
Speech is either free or it isn't. The level of one's offense does not change the principle and, in fact, the grosser the offense the greater the protection required, since offense is a purely subjective response to some irritant. So-called "hate speech" is a bad idea that has gained far too much traction, giving leverage to those who would throttle political discussions.
I hate Hamas probably as much as you do and, viscerally and emotionally, I'd like to see them all killed, but so what? I also see that it's easy for the pro-Israel faction to conflate criticisms of Israel's foreign policy with "antisemitism" since Jewish identity is often deliberately mixed together with the nation's politics to deflect reasonable political criticisms.