Try the political quiz

6 Replies

 @8NRHQC6Liberalfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

 @8M7TL4Cfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

Should be free to say, but there should be consequences for speech that suggests terror/danger. Those who use hate speech depending on their use and content should potentially need mandatory education

 @mrmustacheofrom Quebec answered…4yrs4Y

 @9KFBDW3Conservativefrom Ontario answered…4wks4W

The boundaries of hate speech are too hard to define broadly so course of action must depend on context.

 @9JWTCPTfrom Ontario answered…1mo1MO

Yes, as long as it does not threaten violence... You shouldnt have to see it if you don't want to. Opt out options

 @9HXL8D5from Alberta answered…3mos3MO

We do not have freedom of speech in Canada, we have freedom of expression. Therefore this is irrelevant to Canadians.

 @9HJBY7Tfrom Ontario answered…4mos4MO

depends on what, since everyone perspective is difference and is different at what they stand for, so no

 @9HCP7QVfrom Alberta answered…4mos4MO

Not only should it be protected, but all hate speech laws should be abolished. We have incitement, libel, and slander laws that sufficiently cover issues arising from speech.

 @9H64585answered…4mos4MO

Yes but shouldn’t threaten violence and the government cannot be trusted to define the boundaries without bias

 @9FNQCN7from Alberta answered…6mos6MO

Yes, because than it's easier to address and correct misinformation and hateful ideologies.

 @9F5KMPVfrom Alberta answered…7mos7MO

No, hate speech is harmful and discriminatory and should not be protected free speech should cover ability to criticize the government that's it.

 @9FQ2ZJYfrom Yukon Territory answered…6mos6MO

No, Government shouldn't get to define hate speech. However, any speech that threatens physical harm or incites physical harm on any particluar person or group should be climinal offence.

 @9FQ2ZJYfrom Yukon Territory answered…6mos6MO

Government shouldn't get to define hate speech. However, any speech that threatens physical harm or incites physical harm on any particluar person or group should be climinal offence.

 @92MWQCFfrom British Columbia answered…2yrs2Y

 @8YZ4N54from Ontario answered…2yrs2Y

 @8Y69998from British Columbia answered…2yrs2Y

 @8XJ8R6Vfrom Ontario answered…2yrs2Y

 @8WC5MFZPeople’sfrom Ontario answered…2yrs2Y

NO! Hate speech is too subjective! Free speech for ALL! Call to Action is not speech, but all speech is a protected right!

 @8W6Q9G9from Quebec answered…2yrs2Y

Somewhat, I know all the hate speech sometimes so STUPID and NON-SCENE, but it's their speech, just let them speak as long as they realize how stupid are they. I don't mind if it threatens violence lol.

 @8VWXDZSfrom British Columbia answered…3yrs3Y

 @8VTS2BWfrom Alberta answered…3yrs3Y

 @8VSL6WWNew Democraticfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, it should be protected by the freedom of speech laws, but there should also be penalties under hate crimes

 @8VH22SVfrom Alberta answered…3yrs3Y

Freedom of speech should be protected. The term "hate speech" can be taken very subjectively.

 @8VBY38Bfrom British Columbia answered…3yrs3Y

yes but only because the definitions will constantly evolve and will be too difficult to police. we should regardless stand up for one another and discourage discrimination as we witness it.

 @8V7LPJXfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

The definition of hate speech could be the bible. The bible is not. Some see it other ways. Some things should be protected

 @8V6GHWQfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

 @Kerrnelfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of that speech.

 @8V49CSWfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

 @8TY2FXBfrom British Columbia answered…3yrs3Y

 @8TXZNKMfrom British Columbia answered…3yrs3Y

No, but what constitutes as hate speech should be better defined. There's ignorance, and there's hate.

 @8TWV6HMfrom Quebec answered…3yrs3Y

 @8TTGRBPfrom Prince Edward Island answered…3yrs3Y

 @8TQTW27New Democraticfrom British Columbia answered…3yrs3Y

Freedom of speech laws should protect people from being prosecuted over speech within the confines of personal settings. However, freedom of speech laws should not be used to give a platform to those expressing hateful views, or used to protect those promoting violence or blatant discrimination.

 @8TPYGYVfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

freedom of speech should be used to voice the opinions of the public, to not be prosecuted or judged for one saying however if the speech is being used to condemn other is hateful manner this should be allowed

 @8TG6NWWfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

Yes, because I don’t trust the government to define the boundaries of hate speech and the laws already in place if properly applied should alredy protect people from the same issues (this needs to be enforced).

 @8TD635GLiberalfrom Alberta answered…3yrs3Y

Free speech is important, but hate speech against a specific group should not be allowed, the only thing about that, that should be done is some form of education and acceptance to whatever the hate speech is directed at.

 @8T452LXfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

freedom of speech is designed to protect you from the government aresting you because you voice your opinion against them. Freedom of speech is not the ability to say what you want and get away with it.

 @8T42LDGfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

Yes people should say what they want to say regardless if it is classified as hate speech. That is freedom of speech and if we are restricted to what we can say or not say, that is censorship and not freedom.

 @8T3T55PConservativefrom Ontario commented…3yrs3Y

I think the question is fuzy in that there are law restricting freedom of speech already. Like inciting violence or a call to action are crimes, but hate speech in general is used to restrict freedom of speech by arbitrary calling things hate speech like neo nazis. Either they directly incited violence or it’s free speech. If a nazi want to say stupid things they should be free to even though it’s wrong and stupid obviously

 @8SYPXJXfrom Ontario answered…3yrs3Y

As long as the victims have abilities to fight back RIGHT AWAY, hate speeches shouldn't be prohibited. But if victims in a specific situation that can't fight back, hate speecher should be punished by a lot.

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...