GhostWriter16
Deity
Some more "Harsh" Evangelicals would claim this means they aren't Christian at all

You're assuming that all of that money even goes to the people who need it...
Well, it may not be 'tis true. I was just suggesting that the monetary amount in itself is not too little to make a difference.
I wasn't suggesting the money, even if properly distributed, would put anyone in the lap of luxury, but it could help a good amount of people not starve, again, if properly distributed.
Well, of course, we can't agree with everything our government does. Of course I wish America had hate speech laws, but I can't expect my country to conform exactly to my views, I can only do my part to try to shape my country according to my views.
Saying "I think very specific kinds of speech are hateful and should not be allowed" is taken a bit differently than saying "I don't like free speech" even though I might argue they may not be too different.
In any case, we need to define what's "Hateful."
There's a bit of a sliding scale that could perhaps be introduced:
1. Having absolutely no problem with gay people, the gay lifestyle, exc.
2. Having a personal problem with homosexuality because of religion, but keeping it to yourself.
3. Being willing to call homosexuality a sin if asked, but doesn't support any legal penalties of homosexuality.
4. Wants to allow homosexuality, but wants to indirectly tax it by not wanting to provide any marriage/civil union benefits, and open about such, but not advocating legal punishment.
5. Wanting theoretical laws against sodomy, but not enforcing them, (See Texas a decade ago.)
6. Wanting slightly more harsh laws against homosexuality (The equivalent of, say, speeding)
7. Stating that homosexual acts should be a misdemeanor.
8. Stating that homosexual acts should be a felony.
9. Stating that homosexuals deserve life in prison or execution (TBH I don't see a real practical difference, it more depends on whether you support the DP once you get to this point.)
10. Threatening homosexuals directly (Rather than saying you want the government to execute them, saying you plan to attack them personally)
11. Actually carrying out such threats against homosexuals.
While everyone would ban #11 and the majority would ban #10, the first 9 are all allowed in the US, and you seem to disagree with it. But where do you draw the line? Would you consider more mild attacks against the gay lifestyle (Somewhere between 4-7) to be hateful as well, or only the more extreme ones? Do you consider any and all criticism of homosexuality to be hate speech? We cant really debate this topic until we define our terms. Where is the line for "Hate speech" drawn?