The presence of minority groups with cultural backgrounds that differ from mainstream society cultural standards may determine a gap between social opportunities and personal options: it can be the case that social opportunities in society as a whole are not perceived as effective options by the members of minority groups. Furthermore, the building of options is hindered by the sort of hate messages which strongly affect the portrayal of minority groups and contribute in turn to diminish personal autonomy. The author affirms that, since options are context-dependent and personal autonomy relies on them, hate speech in multicultural societies compromises the degree of personal autonomy of members of minority groups.
R v Keegstra (1990) (Supreme Court of Canada Reports Service [Digest 1654] Excerpts).
3.
Village of Skokie v National Socialist Party of America 373 N.E.2d 21.
4.
Barry, Brian ( 2001) Culture & Equality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
Coleman, James ( 1968) ‘The Concept of Equality of Educational Opportunity’ , Harvard Educational Review38(1): 7-22.
6.
Delgado, Richard (1982) ‘Words That Wound: A Tort Action for Racial Insults, Epithets, and Name-calling’, Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 17: 133-81.
Fiss, Owen ( 1996b) The Irony of Free Speech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
Goldberg, David Theo ( 1995) ‘Afterword: Hate, or Power?’, pp. 267-76 in Rita Kirk Whillock and David Slayden (eds) Hate Speech. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
Greenawalt, Kent ( 1995) Fighting Words. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
11.
Kymlicka, Will ( 1995) Multicultural Citizenship. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
12.
Kymlicka, Will ( 2003) ‘Liberal Theories of Multiculturalism’, pp. 229-50 in L. H. Meyer, S. L. Paulson and T. W. Pogge (eds) Rights, Cultures, and the Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13.
Matsuda, Mari J. ( 1989) ‘Public Response to Racist Speech: Considering the Victim’s Story’, Michigan Law Review87: 2356-73.
14.
Nickel, James W. ( 1987) ‘Equal Opportunity in a Pluralistic Society’ , Social Philosophy and Policy5: 104-19.
15.
O’Neill, Onora ( 1976) ‘Opportunities, Equalities and Education’ , Theory and Decision7(4): 275-95.
16.
Parekh, Bhikhu ( 1995) ‘The Rushdie Affair: Research Agenda for Political Philosophy’, in W. Kymlicka (ed.) The Rights of Minority Cultures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17.
Parekh, Bhikhu ( 2000) Rethinking Multiculturalism. London : Macmillan.
18.
Pettit, Philip ( 2003) ‘Agency-freedom and Option-freedom’, Journal of Theoretical Politics15(4): 387-403.
19.
Raz, Joseph ( 1994) Ethics in the Public Domain. Oxford : Clarendon Press.
20.
Raz, Joseph ( 1998) ‘Multiculturalism’, Ratio Juris11(3): 193-205.
21.
Richards, David A. J. ( 1994) ‘Liberalism, Free Speech, and Justice for Minorities’ , pp. 93-121 in J. L. Coleman and A. Buchanan (eds) In Harm’s Way. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
22.
Sadurski, Wojciech ( 1999) Freedom of Speech and Its Limits. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
23.
Scanlon, Thomas ( 1972) ‘A Theory of Freedom of Expression’, Philosophy and Public Affairs1(2): 204-26.
24.
Schauer, Frederick ( 1982) Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
Sugden, Robert ( 2003) ‘Opportunity as a Space for Individuality: Its Value and the Impossibility of Measuring It’, Ethics113: 783-809.
26.
Sumner, Wayne ( 2001) Hate Speech and the Law: A Canadian Perspective. Amsterdam: Kluwer.
27.
Sunstein, Cass ( 1983) Democracy and the Problem of Free Speech. New York: Free Press.
28.
Taylor, Charles ( 1992) Multiculturalism and ‘the Politics of Recognition’ . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
Weinrib, Lorraine E. ( 1991) ‘Hate Promotion in a Free and Democratic Society: R. v. Keegstra’, McGill Law Review1991 : 1417-49.
