FREEDOM OF SPEECH (ABUSE?)

FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS ABUSE

How can we ban hate speech against Jews while defending mockery of Muslims?

"Jews are religious zealots, obnoxious, money grubbing whiners and have too much influence over U.S. foreign policy."
"Gay men are sick, twisted, promiscuous, genetically diseased and unnatural perverts."
"Muslims are violent religious zealots and martyrs who commit too much terrorism."
"Negroes are parasites, commit too much crime and expect to be compensated for white people enslaving them and making America what it is today."
"Native Americans are all drunkards, economic parasites and still want their original lands returned to them by white Christian settlers."
"Mexicans are bike-stealing, knife wielding thieves that take away American [white people] jobs and send all their money back home to their mommies."
And so on......

All these statements are seemingly guaranteed and protected under the First Amendment and legal to say and print publicly. So, if we take "Freedom of Speech" literally, we can say anything, to anybody, anywhere and at any time.

Hah!
"Not so", say the Courts.

The First Amendment is subject to idiomatic interpretation, clarification, contextual abuse and adaptation., (not unlike the Qur'an, Christian Bibles and the Torah).


Bottom line: "Freedom" of Speech is determined by the "eye of the beholder" and by defintion, debatable, doubtable and inconclusive.
The problem has now turned global.

Islamic governments, angered by an anti-Muslim videos and cartoons have provoked protests and riots in their countries and they are demanding to know why insulting the Prophet Mohammed is free speech but vilifying Jews and denying the Holocaust isn’t.

Egypt’s president said freedom of expression shouldn’t include speech that is “used to incite hatred” or “directed towards one specific religion.” Pakistan’s president urged the “international community” to “criminalize” acts that “endanger world security by misusing freedom of expression.” Yemen’s president called for “international legislation” to suppress speech that “blasphemes the beliefs of nations and defames their figures.” The Arab League’s secretary-general proposed a binding “international legal framework” to “criminalize psychological and spiritual harm” caused by expressions that “insult the beliefs, culture and civilization of others."

From Pakistan to Iran to Saudi Arabia to Egypt to Nigeria to the United Kingdom, Muslims scoff at our rhetoric about free speech. They point to European laws against questioning the Holocaust. Monday on CNN, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad needled British interviewer Piers Morgan: “Why in Europe has it been forbidden for anyone to conduct any research about this event? Why are researchers in prison? … Do you believe in the freedom of thought and ideas, or no?” On Tuesday, Pakistan’s U.N. ambassador, speaking for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, told the U.N. Human Rights Council:

Laws exist in Europe and other countries which impose curbs, for instance, on anti-Semitic speech, Holocaust denial, or racial slurs. We need to acknowledge, once and for all, that Islamophobia in particular and discrimination on the basis of religion and belief are contemporary forms of racism and must be dealt with as such. Not to do so would be a clear example of double standards. Islamophobia has to be treated in law and practice equal to the treatment given to anti-Semitism.

Laws throughout Europe forbid any expression that “minimizes,” “trivializes,” “belittles,” “plays down,” “contests,” or “puts in doubt” Nazi crimes. Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic extend this prohibition to communist atrocities. These laws carry jail sentences of up to five years. Germany adds two years for anyone who “disparages the memory of a deceased person.”

Hate speech laws go further. Germany punishes anyone found guilty of “insulting” or “defaming segments of the population.” The Netherlands bans anything that “verbally or in writing or image, deliberately offends a group of people because of their race, their religion or beliefs, their hetero- or homosexual orientation or their physical, psychological or mental handicap.” It’s illegal to “insult” such a group in France, to “defame” them in Portugal, to “degrade” them in Denmark, or to “expresses contempt” for them in Sweden. In Switzerland, it’s illegal to “demean” them even with a “gesture.” Canada punishes anyone who “willfully promotes hatred.” The United Kingdom outlaws “insulting words or behavior” that arouse “racial hatred.” Romania forbids the possession of xenophobic “symbols.”

The answer to all this:
?