Hate Speech: Related Ideas

Related Ideas
Review these ideas and then use the BACK key in your browser to return to the page you were on.

Malik is faced with a difficult task. He would like to show that the moral obligation to value and respect others (i.e., not to stigmatize them) extends not only to our government but to all individuals. Andrew Koppleman makes an argument that might be used to support Malik's position. The main points of Koppleman's argument can be formalized as follows:

Human beings have a basic need to be recognized by society as valued and respected members of society.
This recognition can only be provided by society.
Therefore society, including private individuals, has a prima facie moral obligation to provide the needed valuation and respect.
This obligation exists unless there are good reasons to suspend it. For example, there is good reason to withhold respect from some criminals.
Race and sex are not good reasons to suspend this obligation.
We all have an moral obligation to value and respect others regardless of race and sex.
In different words, we all have an obligation not to stigmatize others on the basis of race or sex.

This argument raises interesting questions. (1) How do we decide what the basic needs of human beings are? This is especially difficult when we try to go beyond biological needs. (2) How do we pass from basic human needs to moral obligations? Are we obligated to provide for the basic needs of all? Is each of us individually obligated? (3) Assuming that each of us does have a moral obligation to respect and value others, what should be the role of government in carrying out or enforcing this obligation? Should it be written into law? Or should its fulfillment be left to private individuals educating and persuading each other?

Reference: Andrew Koppleman, Antidiscrimination Law and Social Equality, p. 71-2.