随便昨天对本人指责道：“仇恨罪：言论攻击一个民族叫仇恨发言，犯仇恨罪”。然后从维基上抄来一大段关于 hate crime 解释：

In crime and law, hate crimes (also known as bias-motivated crimes) occur when a perpetrator targets a victim because of his or her perceived membership in a certain social group. Examples of such groups include but are not limited to: racial group, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or gender identity.[1]

A hate crime is a category used to describe bias-motivated violence: "assault, injury, and murder on the basis of certain personal characteristics: different appearance, different color, different nationality, different language, different religion."[2]

。。。

（http://bbs.creaders.net/life/bbsviewer.php?trd_id=808373）

逻辑荒诞可笑。

所谓“仇恨发言”（hate speech ）和“仇恨罪”（hate crime）在法律上是风马牛不相及的两码子事，前者关乎言论，非罪；后者则关乎暴力，是行为，如随便抄来的“攻击、伤残和谋杀（assault, injury, and murder）”等等，是罪。不可混淆。

随便在标题上来回倒腾玩弄这两个完全不同的概念，竟然捏造出“仇恨罪 = 仇恨发言”这一法律上根本不成立的概念，其险恶用心是在读者心目中造成一种假象，以为“仇恨发言”和“仇恨犯罪”是一回事。从其发帖后大家辩论的论点等事实证明，大部分心地善良的同学都不幸上当受骗，信以为真，以为五味真的发生什么仇恨罪了。

什么是仇恨言论呢？

“The United States Supreme Court has defined hate speech as any communication that disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or other characteristic.”

（http://parsequalitycenter.org/newsroom/is_hate_speech_constitutionally_protected1）

本人言论是否构成“仇恨言论”聂？具阅读能力的网友当可自行判断，毋庸赘言，况且亦与本话题无关，故按下不表。此处讨论的是，言论是否构成犯罪。

我们知道，在美国，言论自由是公民神圣不可侵犯的权利，受到宪法第一修正案的保护。

那么，所谓“仇恨言论”，是否也受宪法第一修正案的保护聂？

答案是肯定的。

维基“hate speech”的条目中明确地说：

"Laws prohibiting hate speech are unconstitutional in the United States; the United States federal government and state governments are forbidden by the First Amendment of the Constitution from restricting speech. "（http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech）

更详细、更完整的解释，则为：

“In the United States, most forms of hate speech are protected by the U.S. Constitution, and laws prohibiting such speech have been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, with the exception of hate speech deemed to fall into various categories such as obscenity, defamation, incitement to riot, and fighting words. Using principles set forth by the Supreme Court, even in cases where speech would arguably encourage violence, the speech is rendered unlawful only if the threat of violence is imminent and the speech is likely to produce such violence. 

“The “imminence” requirement sets a high hurdle before hate speech can justifiably be proscribed by the state. Speech merely advocating violence is not likely to render it outside of constitutional protections; the words must be directed to incite or produce imminent lawless action, and must be likely to produce that violence as well. By way of example, a fiery speech urging an angry racist mob to immediately assault an Iranian man in its midst probably qualifies as incitement of an imminent threat against the potential victim. But a poster, magazine article, or any publication aimed at stirring up racial hatred, most likely does not qualify as an imminent threat, and would likely be protected by the First Amendment. 

（http://parsequalitycenter.org/newsroom/is_hate_speech_constitutionally_protected1）

所以，所谓“仇恨言论”，在美国，不是犯罪，且受到法律保护。

随便所说的“仇恨罪：言论攻击一个民族叫仇恨发言，犯仇恨罪”纯粹是扯蛋，是故意曲解法律，造谣中伤，以行其诬蔑、诋毁本人之实。

更严重的是，随便触犯了美国法律，对本人构成诽谤罪。其诽谤的恶意、不实、对本人名誉造成的伤害人赃俱在，证据确凿。

本人特借此机会，给随便一个机会做出正式道歉。否则，本人保留对其追究一切法律权利。

附随便原帖：仇恨罪：言论攻击一个民族叫仇恨发言，犯仇恨罪