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
Dec 12, 2025 8:56 AM

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
Vocation isn’t about ‘doing what you love’
We’ve seen a renewed focus among Christians on the deeper value and significance of our work, leading to plenty of fruitful reflection on how we might find and follow God in our economic lives. Yet this same realization has coincided with a growing cultural emphasis on self-actualization and the supposed glories of “doing what you love and loving what you do.” While we may be growing more attentive to the power of “vocation,” we’ve also begun to confuse and conflate...
Enjoy your family Thanksgiving? Socialism would abolish it
If you enjoyed a hearty Thanksgiving meal last week with your family, you have a personal incentive to oppose socialism. Extreme egalitarians would like to ban these kinds of family celebrations – by abolishing the family. The purveyors of woke ideology have long asserted that only collectivizing the family can bring true social equality. However, they are now casting the blame on the free market. As if suffering from a guilty conscience, the New York Times published an article the...
Three developments or reversals of Church doctrine?
“The Church changed its teaching on usury.” If I had ten cents for every time I have heard this, by now I might have enough to buy myself lunch – and more! However, if I had been collecting interest on that money, would I have earned enough to make me immoral? It seems to be a hard pill to swallow either way: is the classical teaching on usury wrong, or is the modern banking system wrong? It might be a...
‘Democratic socialist’ policies made the poor poorer: Study
Christians who oppose government intervention are often accused of harboring indifference, or antipathy, for the poor. But an abundance of evidence from two continents shows that welfare state policies actually reduce the wealth of the poor and raise prices, while benefiting the upper-middle class and well-connected corporations at taxpayers’ expense. A report from the European Central Bank analyzed 13 European nations and found that the higher the level of social welfare programs – the sort of entitlements many equate with...
Acton Line podcast: Rev. Robert Sirico responds to Marco Rubio’s ‘common good capitalism’
Sen. Marco Rubio’s recent proposals for mon good capitalism’ have sparked much criticism and praise. Rubio draws heavily from Catholic Social Teaching in his defense mon good capitalism, describing an ideal economy for mon good characterized by dignified work and stability for working families. On November 5, Rubio addressed students at the Catholic University of America, saying “[c]ommon good capitalism is about a vibrant and growing free market, but it is also about harnessing and channeling that growth for the...
Anti-Semitism and Britain’s Labour Party
Britain’s 2019 General Election is unusual for many reasons. It’s not odd for British religious leaders to express their views about what they think their congregants should consider before they go to the polls. But the entire country was taken aback late last month when Britain’s mild-mannered Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis (who heads what’s called the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth) published a public letter in the London Times in which he effectively advised people not to vote for...
Why the West needs reasoned faith
“Our society needs reasoned faith,” writes Rachel Lu at Law and Liberty. “Fortunately, Samuel Gregg has reminded us with his recent book, Reason, Faith, and the Struggle for Western Civilization.” In a review of Gregg’s latest book, Lu writes that it serves to remind us how faith and reason cannot flourish when separated and that bination is an integration that the West depends on. Faith and reason are not star-crossed lovers; they are literally a match made in Heaven. Gregg’s...
Do classical liberals ‘pave the way for white nationalists’?
Matthew Schmitz’s article “How classical liberals paved the way for white nationalists” in the Catholic Herald borrows a conceit from Robert Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: Both place two unrelated phenomena in their titles for dramatic effect. Pirsig admitted his fictionalized autobiography “should in no way be associated with that great body of factual information relating to orthodoxZen Buddhistpractice. It’s not very factual onmotorcycles, either.” It is a pity Schmitz was not as ing about his column....
(Pope) John Paul, George, and Ringo on the harms of high taxes (video)
Every November 29, fans pause to remember George Harrison of The Beatles, who died in 2001. In addition to his sensitive lyrics, intricate melodies, and legendary chart-topping success Harrison should be remembered for another feat: He may have been the first singing supply-side economist. In a 1969 interview with David Wigg, Harrison showed profound insight into how taxes discourage work and wealth creation. “The shy Beatle,” as he was known, said: Britain in a way, you know, it cuts its...
Catholic social teaching is for all of life
Senator Marco Rubio’s interest in Catholic social teaching is exciting even if confused in its economic analysis and public policy mendations. On the Acton Line Podcast released today I discuss with Fr. Robert Sirico the promise and peril of politicians looking to Catholic social teaching for guidance. The promise is in grounding questions of politics in the true nature of the human person and society while the peril is in reducing Catholic social teaching to a mere set of public...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved