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 14, 2026 11:37 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
Sew Efficient
US News and World Report has a little feature on a pany that has expanded into more distant markets and thereby grown. The article identifies trade agreements and technology as paving the way for such expansion by many small, local businesses. Decreasing tariffs and regulation and improving technology—these are examples of what economists call “lowering transaction costs,” which improves efficiency and benefits producers and consumers alike. The US News article highlights an American business, but, even more crucially, opening international...
Protestants and Natural Law: A Forgotten Legacy
In this mentary, “Protestants and Natural Law: A Forgotten Legacy,” I ask the question: “So, why don’t Protestants like Natural Law?” The short answer is: There isn’t a short answer. Tracing out the reasons that twentieth-century Protestants have given for why natural law is off limits plicated and can take a person in many different directions. In my judgment, the great tragedy in the Protestant rejection of natural law is not merely that Protestants (and particularly evangelicals) have had tremendous...
GM Bacteria and Malaria
“Scientists have discovered a way to help stop the spread of malaria by genetically altering a bacterium that infects about 80 percent of the world’s insects. Malaria is primarily transmitted through mosquito bites and kills more than a million people every year.” Source: “Genetically Altered Bacteria Could Block Malaria Transmission,” by Lisa Pickoff-White, The National Academies, Science in the Headlines, August 2, 2006. HT: Zondervan “To the Point” For more on the fight against malaria, visit Acton’s Impact campaign page....
Our Changing Environmental Perspective
Seth Godin, a marketing guru, passes along this nugget: One mistake marketers make is a little like the goldfish that never notices the water in his tank. Our environment is changing. Always. Incrementally. Too slowly to notice, sometimes. But it changes. What we care about and talk about and react to changes every day. Starbucks couldn’t have launched in 1970. We weren’t ready. Of course, sometimes the reason that our perspective on an issue changes is because the thing itself...
The Cash Cow
CRC has made two good articles available recently (these are Adobe .pdf linked documents) that dispell the myth that large corporations are conservative monoliths supporting anti-environment causes. The first is Funding Liberalism with Blue-Chip Profits; Fortune 100 Foundations Back Leftists Causes. The other is called The Price of Doing Business: Environmentalist Groups Toe Funders’ Lines. Both have page after page of data on the amounts that organizations like Earth Justice, Nature Conservancyਊnd Sierra Club are getting from big business and billion dollar...
Scarcity and Innovation
“Throughout history, shortages of vital resources have driven innovation, and energy has often starred in these technological dramas. The desperate search for new sources of energy and new materials has frequently produced remarkable advances that no one could have imagined when the shortage first became evident.” So says Stephen L. Sass, a professor of materials science and engineering at Cornell, in today’s NYT op-ed, “Scarcity, Mother of Invention.” He concludes, “If there is anything to be learned from history, it’s...
‘Beyond Petroleum’ or ‘Big Problem’? UPDATED
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams is asking, “Was the BP pipeline problem preventable?” It seems that BP has allegedly been giving required maintenance to the pipeline short shrift: “Allegations about BP’s maintenance practices have been so persistent that a criminal investigation now is under way into whether BP has for years deliberately shortchanged maintenance and falsified records to cover it up.” BP shut down the Prudhoe Bay oil field earlier this week, after a “spill” resulting from “unexpected corrosion.”...
The Effects of Federal Unionism
According to figures recently released by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, federal workers receive on average about double what private sector workers make: $106,579 vs. $53,289. These numbers are based on pensation. A study done by the Cato Institute (PDF here of 2004 figures), under the direction of Chris Edwards, shows that for 2005, “If you consider wages without benefits, the average federal civilian worker earned $71,114, 62 percent more than the average private-sector worker, who made $43,917.” In...
Corporate America and the Campus
More news on the campus that may disturb those who are already hyperventilating about corporate involvement in higher education: university newspapers are receiving increasing corporate attention. In an article in today’s WSJ, Emily Steel writes, “Hip, local, relevant and generated by students themselves, college newspapers have held steady readership in recent years while newspapers in general have seen theirs shrink. Big advertisers are going on campus to reach these young readers. Ford Motor Co., Microsoft Corp., Samsung Electronics Co., and...
Local Help on the Street
We’re working through the meaning of the tenth anniversary of welfare reform, debating important ‘next phase’ issues like marriage and fatherhood and what those mean to helping people leave poverty…permanently. That debate about government’s appropriate role in addressing social need is important. At least equally important is the work or private citizens at the local level, ‘on the street’–figuratively and literally. In February, a blog post featured A Way Out Victim Assistance program in Memphis, one of Acton’s Samaritan Award...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved