Philosophical question

Some grafittied the Torrance Chick Fil A with “Tastes like hate”. My question is this: Could this ever be considered hate speech since what started the whole mess was hate speech by one of the owners?

4 thoughts on “Philosophical question

  1. I wouldn’t think so; hate speech is something that vilifies and/or encourages violence against someone based on a characteristic like race, religion, orientation, etc. The graffiti sounds like just a statement to me. (Besides, donating such a huge amount of money to groups that want gays imprisoned or dead pretty much did their own vilifying. I don’t think they need any help on that angle.)


  2. Graffiti is vandalism and therefore is illegal. However, graffiti has been a form of social and political dissent since ancient times. That is what this is. I can think of a really good (and fairly funny) statement to make that MIGHT be considered hate speech, but it is too crude to put here. 🙂


  3. Sorry, love, but hate is hate. Responding to hate with hate is still hate. So, yes, it’s hate speech, much as I despise CFA’s owner’s stance. And agree with janedeartemis: the imagination runs wild (but never gets out of the gutter)


Comments are closed.