Statements, oral, written, or recorded, made in an area open to the public by right or by invitation, which promote hatred against any member of a protected group is subject to indictment and a possible two-year jail sentence. Their courts have held that hate speech is destructive of a democratic society, in that it undermines the self-esteem of members of the target group and delegitimizes their participation in the public political forum. As a consequence, the Canadian courts hold that it is justifiable to limit the hate promoter's right to expression in favor of promoting a public environment free of hate and vilification. Many in the US civil rights community see Canada as a model and would like the US to adopt similar hate speech or group defamation laws. Recently, as reported by Frank York in World Net Daily, the Council of Religious Leaders of Chicago objected to the plans of the Southern Baptist Convention for a 100,000-person evangelistic outreach in Chicago.
Group identity becomes more important than the exercise of free speech.
In the US, such results are currently achieved by public pressure and moral persuasion. The power of public persuasion and financial coercion should not be underestimated. These are the same justifications used to punish hate speech in Canada. In the same vein, all the various speech codes at universities all over the US punish hate speech, and are enforced by those schools despite the First Amendment. Restrictions on demonstrators at abortion clinics rest on much the same basis of providing freedom from a hostile environment.