Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Iuris Dictio

Miscelánea

Núm. 22 (2018)

Fifty Shades of Tolerance: Human Rights Argumentations concerning Family Models and Hate Speech

DOI
https://doi.org/10.18272/iu.v22i22.1013
Submitted
December 19, 2017
Published
2018-12-13

Abstract

The protection of human rights is one of the main obligations a state has in order to fulfill its duties. Therefore, the right of freedom of expression shall be protected, especially because it relates directly to the defense of the democratic of a society. Although there are different points of view regarding an issue, especially same-sex marriage, the state is obligated to stay neutral towards public opinions. Consequently, public opinions might end up transforming into hate speech which creates an even larger confrontation within people and the state. This is why, the state must establish fair limits for human rights. Finally, it is essential to understand that promoting tolerance is the most important aspect to safeguard the rights of people to freely speak their minds in order to exercise their right of freedom of speech. viewed = 430 times

References

  1. Albert, R. (2015). Te Unamendable Core of the United States Constitution. In A. Koltay (ed.). Comparative Perspectives on the Fundamental Freedom of Expression (14). Budapest: Wolters Kluver.
  2. Al Jazeera (2005). Ahmadinejad: Holocaust a myth.
  3. Attarian, J. (2000). Let Boys Be Boys"”Exploding Feminist Dogma, Tis Provocative Book Reveals How Educators Are Trying to Feminize Boys While Neglecting Teir Academic and Moral Instruction. The World and I.
  4. Belavusau, U. (2015). Memory Laws and Freedom of Speech: Governance of History in European Law. In A. Koltay (ed.). Comparative Perspectives on the Fundamental Freedom of Expression (535-541). Budapest: Wolters Kluver.
  5. D. Pruett, K. (1999) Fatherneed: Why Father Care is As Essential As Mother Care for Your Child. New York: The Free Press. John Attarian: Let Boys Be Boys - Exploding Feminist Dogma. The World and I. 200. Oct 1.
  6. Pollock, W. (1998). Real Boys: Rescuing Out Sons from the Myths of Boyhood. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
  7. Pope Francis (2015). Family - 28. The family spirit. General Audience.
  8. Robertson, G. (2015). An Inconvenient Genocide: Who Now Remembers the Armenians? London: Biteback Publishing.
  9. Sayare, S. / Arsu, S. (2012). Genocide Bill Angers Turks as It Passes in France. The New York Times.
  10. Smuk, P. (2015). Te Constitutional Guarantees of Democratic Political Discourses and their Regulation in Central Europe. In A. Koltay (ed.). Comparative Perspectives on the Fundamental Freedom of Expression (89). Budapest: Wolters Kluver.
  11. Stone, G.R. (2015). Free Speech in the 21st Century. In A. Koltay (ed.). Comparative Perspectives on the Fundamental Freedom of Expression (125). Budapest: Wolters Kluver.
  12. Legislation:
  13. Congress of the United States of America (1787). Constitution of the United States of America. May 5, 1992.
  14. Le Conseil constitutionne (2013). Décision n° 2013-669 DC du 17 mai 2013.
  15. Ministry of the Interior (2009). Criminal Code (Act No. 40/2009). January 8, 2009.
  16. Parliament of Hungary (2012). Criminal Code (Act C of 2012). June 25, 2012.
  17. Senate of the Republic of Poland (1997). Te Penal Code (Act of 6 June 1997). June 6, 1997.
  18. Sentences:
  19. Constitutional Court of Hungary (1992). 30/1992 (V. 26) CC. From May 18, 1992. Code 30/1992 (V. 26) CC.
  20. Constitutional Court of Hungary (1995). 14/1995. (III. 13.) CC. From March 7, 1995. Code 14/1995. (III. 13.) CC.
  21. Council of Europe: European Council of Human Rights (2010). Alekseyev v. Russia. From October 21, 2010. Application nos. 4916/07, 25924/08 and 14599/09.
  22. Council of Europe: European Council of Human Rights (2010). Schalk and Kopf v. Austria. From 22 June 2010. Code Application No. 30141/04. US Supreme Court (1942). Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire. 315 US 568.