PDA

View Full Version : Bulls' Noah sorry for alleged gay slur toward fan [ESPN]



RoboHicks
05-23-2011, 01:20 AM
http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6577126&campaign=rss&source=NBAHeadlines (http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6577126&campaign=rss&source=NBAHeadlines&service=bit.ly&source=espn)Bulls center Joakim Noah apologized for allegedly using a gay slur toward a fan during Chicago's 96-85 loss to the Miami Heat in Game 3 of the Eastern Conference finals.

More... (http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6577126&campaign=rss&source=NBAHeadlines)

cgehlhausen4
05-23-2011, 02:42 AM
Who cares. Freedom of speech.

ilive4sports
05-23-2011, 03:16 AM
Who cares. Freedom of speech.

FYI, hate speech does not fall under the first amendment.

He should be fined $100k, just like Kobe was. While it is excessive, the precedent has been set. Ironically this was on air not to long before or after the new Grant Hill commercial talking about using "gay" to mean stupid.

pwee31
05-23-2011, 08:01 AM
It was plain as day after he got his 2nd foul the camera caught him, and I was like well that's a fine.

The trouble I have with it all, is the cameramen. Of course these players shouldn't be using slurs at anyone at anytime, but stuff slips out when you're mad that you don't mean.

Yeah you can control yourself, but I guarantee if the camera doesn't pick it up, nothing happens.

Hicks
05-23-2011, 08:42 AM
FYI, hate speech does not fall under the first amendment.


:confused: I'm really not sure about that. Source?

This suggests you're mostly inaccurate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech

Trader Joe
05-23-2011, 12:00 PM
FYI, hate speech does not fall under the first amendment.



Since when?

ilive4sports
05-23-2011, 03:37 PM
Its not that hate speech is illegal in any way. It just doesn't fall under freedom of speech. You can get into trouble for hate speech. You can be sued. It's unconstitutional for laws to be made banning hate speech. But that doesn't mean you have the right to call someone a ****ing ***got.


The "reason why fighting words are categorically excluded from the protection of the First Amendment is not that their content communicates any particular idea, but that their content embodies a particularly intolerable (and socially unnecessary) mode of expressing whatever idea the speaker wishes to convey."

So while you aren't going to be arrested for "hate speech" (which is a broad and vague term which leads to problems), it isn't protected by the first amendment. I wish I had access to some of my stuff from my Media Law class because we got into this quite a bit.

EDIT: Oh and the quote is right from that wikipedia entry Hicks posted which comes from a US Supreme Court Case, R.A.V. v City Of St. Paul.

Hicks
05-23-2011, 04:09 PM
But calling someone a ****ing ***got isn't necessarily "fighting words", and wouldn't that be subjective?

ilive4sports
05-23-2011, 04:14 PM
But calling someone a ****ing ***got isn't necessarily "fighting words", and wouldn't that be subjective?

Well pretty much any speech is subjective. Obviously this is why the fan won't be suing Noah. But if he really wanted to, he could. Not saying he would win.

There are situations where calling someone a ****ing ***got could be considered fighting words. If this situation between Noah and the fan had escalated more, they most certainly would be considered fighting words, just as the ones the fan most likely said as well.

There is a reason Noah will be getting fined for this.