Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Americans would probably ban hateful speech—if we could agree on what speech is hateful
Americans would probably ban hateful speech—if we could agree on what speech is hateful
Jan 16, 2026 11:09 PM

A slight majority of Americans oppose banning hateful and offensive speech—but mostly because we can’t agree on what speech is hateful and offensive.

That’s a key takeaway from the Cato Institute’s new survey report, “The State of Free Speech and Tolerance in America.” The findings in almost every category are distressing for those who abhor offensive speech but believe it should remain legal to express such sentiments in the public square.

According to the report, only 59 percent of Americans say people should be allowed to express unpopular opinions in public, even those that are deeply offensive to other people, while a substantial minority (40 percent) say government should prevent people from engaging in hate speech against certain groups in public.

The divide is mostly based on race, ethnicity, and partisan affiliation. While solid majorities of Republicans (72 percent) and independents (60 percent) oppose government banning hate speech, Democrats stand out with a slim majority in support (52 percent). However, African American and Latino Democrats largely drive these numbers with a majority (55 percent) of white Democrats saying government should allow public hate speech, but majorities of black Democrats (59 percent) and Hispanic Democrats (65 percent) saying it should prevent such speech in public.

Among college graduates, 64 percent say hate speech should be legal and a third (36 percent) say it should not. But current college and graduate students are equally split on the issue, with nearly half (49 percent) of current students saying government should ban hate speech and nearly half (49 percent) saying it should not.

Libertarians (82 percent) are the most opposed to hate speech laws, followed by Conservatives (75 percent) and a slim majority (53 percent) of Liberals. However, nearly two-thirds of Populists (64 percent) say government should prevent hate speech in public.

It seems the main thing holding back hates speech laws (aside from the First Amendment) is that American can’t agree on what constitutes hate speech:

59 percent of liberals and 17 percent of conservatives say it’s hate speech to say transgender people have a mental disorder39 percent of conservatives and 17 percent of liberal believe it’s hate speech to say the police are racist80 percent of liberals and 36 percent of conservatives say it’s hateful or offensive to say illegal immigrants should be deported87 percent of liberals and 47 percent of conservatives say it’s hateful or offensive to say women shouldn’t fight in bat roles90 percent of liberals and 47 percent of conservatives say it’s hateful or offensive to say homosexuality is a sin.

While there is disagreement on what counts as hate speech, you can find almost one-third of Americans who would support banning it for just about any group.

Consider the percentage of Americans who would ban hateful or offensive speech against the following groups: African Americans (46 percent), Jewish Americans (41 percent), immigrants (40 percent), armed service members (40 percent), Hispanics (39 percent), Muslims (37 percent), the police (37 percent), gays, lesbians, and transgender people (36 percent), Christians (35 percent), white people (32 percent).

In fact, you can find almost a third of Americans who consider it morally acceptable to use physical violence against Nazis as a reaction to their speech (32 percent), support banning Holocaust denial (35 percent), and believe revoking a person’s citizenship is a reasonable response to flag burning (39 percent).

Perhaps the most disturbing finding of the survey is that more than half of Americans (53 percent) say hate speech is an act of violence. While two-thirds (66 percent) of Democrats say hate speech is violence, 58 percent of Republicans say hate speech is not violence. Independents are split, with 51 percent who disagree hate speech is tantamount to violence.

African Americans (75 percent) and Latinos (72 percent) are nearly 30 points more likely than white Americans (46 percent) to believe hate speech is violence. Instead, a slim majority (53 percent) of white Americans believe it is not.

While nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of women believe hate speech is violence, a majority (56 percent) of men disagree.

Americans under 30 (60 percent) and seniors (57 percent) are also more likely than middle-aged Americans (35-64) to believe hate speech is violence (49 percent).

If speech is violence, how much longer will Americans allow it to be protected by law? And how long do we have before opposing banning “hateful” speech is considered a hate crime in America?

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
From mendicants to merchants: The monastic embrace of enterprise
“If a man does not work, neither shall he eat,” wrote the Apostle Paul in the New Testament. But what if your vocation demands that you own nothing and spend much of your time in contemplation of ethereal mysteries? In time, even religious orders intended to live as mendicants (beggars) allowed some system of ownership. Occasionally, without any profit motive, monasteries acquired not insignificant fortunes. Some also engaged in enterprise – offering products they created on the open market. “In...
Why is health insurance so complicated?
Car insurance and life insurance are rather simple. So why is health insurance plicated? And why can’t it be more like other forms of insurance? Lanhee Chen, a fellow at the Hoover Institution, explains what make health insurance so different—and plex. ...
Explainer: What you need to know about Catalonia’s independence 1-0 referendum
Voters who took part in yesterday’s national 1-0 referendum overwhelmingly supported Catalonia’s independence from Spain, and images of the Spanish National Police brutally suppressing the election have flooded the international media. But any honest accounting of the 1-0 referendum requires a deeper nuance that leaves no party looking heroic. The 1-0 referendum On October 1, Catalonia held an election asking voters,“Do youwantCatalonia to e an independent state in theform of a republic?” Catalonia, which has seen its autonomy wax and...
How do Western nations rank on economic freedom?
The Fraser Institute released its annual “Economic Freedom of the World” report this morning. The free market think tank rates every nation based on its “degree of freedom in five broad areas”: Area 1:Size of Government—As spending and taxation by government, and the size of government-controlled enterprises increase, government decision-making is substituted for individual choice and economic freedom is reduced.Area 2:Legal System and Property Rights—Protection of persons and their rightfully acquired property is a central element of both economic freedom...
6 ways economic freedom benefits the global poor
Even most critics admit the free market is the greatest wealth-generating system in history, but they say the poor benefit more from interventionist economic systems. In fact, economic liberty elevates the least well-off in more laissez-faire nations to a better position than those living in unfree economies based on such factors as average e, life expectancy, literacy, and other forms of personal liberty. The data bearing out each point are contained in theFraser Institute’s most recent“Economic Freedom of the World”...
How protectionism is hindering Puerto Rico relief efforts
A week after being devastated by Hurricane Maria, the citizens of Puerto Rico are as CNN points out, “suffering in primitive conditions without power, water or enough fuel.” Unfortunately, the recovery efforts are being impeded further by a nearly 100-year-old crony capitalist law. Crony capitalism or cronyism is a general term for the range of activities in which particular individuals or businesses in a market economy receive government-granted privileges over their customers petitors. One of the mon—and nefarious—types of cronyism...
Watch live: Mollie Hemingway on the media’s crisis of credibility
Can’t make to Grand Rapids for Mollie Hemingway’s talk today on the media? No problem. We’re streaming it online live starting around noon. The talk will also be shown live on Acton’s Facebook page. More on the event and the speaker: Trust in media institutions is at a historic low. Much of the country is overtly hostile to “fake news.” The media is desperate to recover its authority, even as it has e more biased, less substantive, and less civil...
5 Facts about federal regulations
Vice President Pence will be giving a speech today emphasizing the importance the Trump administration places on reviewing regulatory policy. Today’s date of October 2 was selected to mark the start of the next fiscal year, when federal agencies will be expected to generate below zero dollars in net new regulatory costs. Here are five facts you should know about federal regulations: 1.Regulations are rules that have the force of law and that are issued by various federal government departments...
Lord Acton on conscience: The light of freedom
In the public imagination, Lord Acton is often restricted to his ubiquitous aphorism about power and corruption. This is a pity, as the nineteenth century essayist, historian, and parliamentarian held wide-ranging views about liberty as well-developed as they were penetrating. Eugenio Lopes explores these views, noting the interrelationship between power and conscience in Lord Acton’s writings. For Acton, “Freedom depends on a well-formed conscience,” Lopes writes. Absolutist political forces continually shape and bend public morality to their own, corrupt vision...
The cultural connection between economics and belief
Is there a connection between economics and belief? In a recent Karam Forum lecture for the Oikonomia Network, theologian Jay Moon uses a Perplexus ball to explain the overlapping influence and impact of distinct cultural spheres — what anthropologists call the “functional integration of culture.” According to anthropologist Darrell Whiteman, every culture can be understood as having three interconnecting sectors: (1) an economics and technology sector, (2) a social relationships sector, and (3) an ideology and belief sector. “These sectors...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved