Hateful criticism should be answered politically, not legally

Evidence

Hate speech laws – the outlawing of certain forms of speech defined as hateful – have become accepted as essential weapons in combating bigotry. But just as the received wisdom that it is morally wrong to give offence is misplaced, so is the received wisdom that hate speech and bigotry should be outlawed. We certainly need to resist all attempts to use criticism of Islam to demonize Muslims. But criticism, of whatever kind, even if it is hateful or bigoted, should be seen as a moral and political, not legal, issue. — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 666

Categorization

• SEED: This position — that even hateful speech should be countered morally rather than criminalized — is a live, contestable stance an essay could push against: what changes when the state withdraws from punishing bigotry?
• XREF: connects to: Policing speech obscures the line between offence, hatred, and violence. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 655; Bigoted speech should be countered morally and politically, not legally. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 671; One should act against criticism rather than defend against it — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 900 (+2 more)

Related

• Bigoted speech should be countered morally and politically, not legally. (similarity 0.93)
• Criticism of religious ideas should never be restricted as Islamophobic (similarity 0.82)
• Legal censorship lets anti-racists abandon open argument against prejudice (similarity 0.82)
• Anti-racists’ expansion of ‘hatred’ legitimizes state censorship of minorities (similarity 0.82)
• Policing speech obscures the line between offence, hatred, and violence. (similarity 0.81)
• Giving offence and fomenting hatred are morally distinct acts (similarity 0.80)
• Fighting Islamophobia need not stifle legitimate criticism of Muslims (similarity 0.80)
• Censoring bigotry makes opponents complacent and shirks the work of countering it. (similarity 0.80)
• Giving up the right to offend forfeits the power to challenge injustice. (similarity 0.80)
• Opponents argue Islamophobia labels are deployed politically to suppress legitimate criticism. (similarity 0.80)
• Hate speech laws now disproportionately criminalize Muslim and dissenting speech. (similarity 0.79)
• Western hate and Holocaust-denial laws contradict the ridicule of Muslim demands for speech limits. (similarity 0.79)
• The term ‘Islamophobia’ conflates criticism of Islam with hatred of Muslims (similarity 0.78)
• Criticism that endangers Muslim safety crosses into Islamophobia. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Legal censorship lets anti-racists abandon open argument against prejudice #corroborates (0.88) — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 675
• One should act against criticism rather than defend against it #expands (0.85) — Philip Chase Bobbitt, Reflections Inspired by My Critics, 900
• Islamophobia is political rather than religious and must be fought politically #corroborates (0.75) — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 576