Should it become a Offense to say Homophobic statements?

[Zychonia]

I am posting this due to the fact that I am a believer in the right to say whatever you want, providing it is not causing people harm or upset. I'm homosexual and I can understand Homophobia hurts, especially when I held a male friend's hand in public. However, I want to have a wider debate on NS on whever free speech should be protected for sexual or ethic minorities.

[Baltenstein]

Only if you are actually asking people to engange in violence against homosexuals.

[Imperializt Russia]

In the UK, use of vulgar or offensive language in a public place is a violation of Section 5 of the Public Order Act.
In some places, use of homophobic (or other) slurs is categorised as "hate crime".

[Bavmark]

No.

[Bulgar Rouge]

Absolutely not.

People should learn not to get offended that easily and be a bit tougher instead. That's valid for everyone, not just the LGBT community.

[Imperializt Russia]

No.

And why not?

Personally, I use the term "faggot", a common homophobic slur far too often (though not directed as a homophobic slur) but still.

[Imperializt Russia]

Absolutely not.

People should learn not to get offended that easily and be a bit tougher instead. That's valid for everyone, not just the LGBT community.

It's not about "my word, I am offended". It's about the sentiment it carries and the violence it supports.
The sometimes murderous violence.

[Alcase]

Like, a criminal offense?

A verbal offense?

Should we be taking homophobic slurs as offensive? The question isn't too clear.

[Zychonia]

Absolutely not.

People should learn not to get offended that easily and be a bit tougher instead. That's valid for everyone, not just the LGBT community.

In response to that, I try not to get offended. However, when I or any other Bi, Gay or Lesbian person gets called "Fag" or another homophobic comment while holding hands or kissing someone of the same-sex in public. It is difficult not to get offended!!!

[Keyboard Warriors]

Not all homophobic statements should be met with a government sanction. There are already laws to cover the ones that should. Intent and context are extremely important when dealing with such matters.

[Zychonia]

Like, a criminal offense?

A verbal offense?

Should we be taking homophobic slurs as offensive? The question isn't too clear.

I mean a criminal offence with a penalty e.g. fine.

[Bavmark]

No.

And why not?

Personally, I use the term "faggot", a common homophobic slur far too often (though not directed as a homophobic slur) but still.

I don't believe in censoring people's opinions (offensive or not), I hate bigotry but doesn't I am going to force someone to keep quiet; if I know if someone is a bigot then it'll be easier to just avoid them rather than banning their beliefs.

[Bulgar Rouge]

Absolutely not.

People should learn not to get offended that easily and be a bit tougher instead. That's valid for everyone, not just the LGBT community.

It's not about "my word, I am offended". It's about the sentiment it carries and the violence it supports.
The sometimes murderous violence.

If someone's intent is murder it would be unlikely for prohibition of hate speech to stop them.

In response to that, I try not to get offended. However, when I or any other Bi, Gay or Lesbian person gets called "Fag" or another homophobic comment while holding hands or kissing someone of the same-sex in public. It is difficult not to get offended!!!

I've been offended for an open demonstration of political beliefs (Lenin badge), clothing style, and weight, back when I had a lot of it. There will always be no-lifers finding existential pleasure out of offending others. The best solution is either to ignore them totally, which will hurt them (they won't get the attention they want), or show them teeth. Banning homophobic slurs will not solve the problem, dealing with it on a personal level will.

[Keyboard Warriors]

And why not?

Personally, I use the term "faggot", a common homophobic slur far too often (though not directed as a homophobic slur) but still.

I don't believe in censoring people's opinions (offensive or not), I hate bigotry but doesn't I am going to force someone to keep quiet; if I know if someone is a bigot then it'll be easier to just avoid them rather than banning their beliefs.

There's much more to this than banning opinions.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's not about "my word, I am offended". It's about the sentiment it carries and the violence it supports.
The sometimes murderous violence.

If someone's intent is murder it would be unlikely for prohibition of hate speech to stop them.

There was a point, right, and there was that space over your head, yeah, and it just sailed right through that.

Homophobic slurs, used as homophobic slurs, implicitly condones homophobia. The extreme of homophobia is homophobic assault and sometimes murder.
By refusing to address homophobic slurs as verbal attacks, you create the environment that makes people think it is acceptable to murder homosexuals and other aspects of the LGBT community.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Of course not. Legally forbidding people from saying certain things doesn't keep them from being believed and passed down. The only way to deal with homophobes is to show how ridiculous their beliefs are. I'm perfectly happy with the growing social disapproval of anti-gay types. No need to turn them into a bunch of free speech martyrs.

[Wickedly evil people]

criminal offenses for speech are a violation of basic human rights and should not be countenanced. speech is not violence and no one should be able to use that excuse to persecute those they don't like or respect.

In other words if you're an idiot that allows hateful speech to incite you to violence you need to go to jail, not the person making the stupid public statement.

[WestRedMaple]

No, violating someone's rights because you don't like what they say is a far far greater offense than someone using language that someone else doesn't like.

[Herskerstad]

If you are deliberately provoking violence? Yes.

Otherwise, no, there is no right not to be offended by others.

[Imperializt Russia]

If you are deliberately provoking violence? Yes.

Otherwise, no, there is no right not to be offended by others.

You don't have a right to try to do so either.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

If you are deliberately provoking violence? Yes.

Otherwise, no, there is no right not to be offended by others.

You don't have a right to try to do so either.

Legally, in America, you actually do have that right.

[Pope Joan]

There may be sanctions other than the heavy hand of government.

Social rejection.

Civil suit.

Economic pressure.

With regard to racial slurs, look what happened to Donald Sterling, and what may yet happen to Danny Ferry. No government involvement required.

That is called letting the market take its course.

As for those who have nothing to lose economically or socially, well, they are going to fill those futbol stadiums anyway, aren't they? But even then, their ignorant taunts may prove costly to their team.

[Gun Manufacturers]

I am posting this due to the fact that I am a believer in the right to say whatever you want, providing it is not causing people harm or upset. I'm homosexual and I can understand Homophobia hurts, especially when I held a male friend's hand in public. However, I want to have a wider debate on NS on whever free speech should be protected for sexual or ethic minorities.

Almost anything can cause people upset. My rooting for the NY Yankees causes upset to Boston Red Sox fans.

Unless a person is causing actual harm with their speech, its protected by the 1st Amendment.

[Cymbru]

I think it is in Britain? At least if said in public anyhow.

[WestRedMaple]

If you are deliberately provoking violence? Yes.

Otherwise, no, there is no right not to be offended by others.

You don't have a right to try to do so either.

Try to do what?