Well, this is fucked up. I'm not sure if I'm more afraid of the lawyer speaking or the people calling in. In any event, the boundry question here is lets say I make rock music thats really angsty and for some people it incites them to violence. How do you define intent? If I know that a minority of the people who hear me are going to react in a certain way do I need to stop talking about it even though I think it has other, useful purposes? Seem so, and it seems like the speak would say thats fine because we can do without my speech.

This speaker claims there is no value in Return to Castle Wolfenstein because Germany is able to have a functional democracy even though that video game is illegal there. I think he is missing an important element of what the first amendment really means.

I hope this thing doesn't become a political football because no one is going to vote for hate speech.

Bruce Fein and Hate Speech