000			03027nam a22002897a 4500
003			OSt
005			20190717104043.0
008			170125b xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
040			_aUniversity of Cebu-Banilad _cUniversity of Cebu-Banilad
100			_aTumulak, Karla Marie T.
245			_aBehind the cloak of religion, can 'hate speech' be protected speech? / _cKarla Marie T. Tumulak.
260			_aCebu City : _c2016. _bUniversity of Cebu,
300			_avii, 198 leaves ;
336			_2rdacontent _atext
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume
501			_aThesis (Degree of Juris Doctor) -- University of Cebu-Banilad, 2016.
504			_aIncludes bibliographical references (leaves 184-194).
505			_aContents: Chapter I: The problem and its scope -- Chapter II: Review of related literature and studies theoretical framework, and conceptual framework -- Chapter III: Results and discussions -- Chapter IV: Summary of findings, conclusion, and recommendations -- References -- Appendices -- Curriculum Vitae.
520			_aSummary : The principle of primacy of free speech and religious liberty is reflected in the many decisions of the Philippine Supreme Court intended to guard these fundamental liberties within the bounds of permissible Constitutional limits. The study's main problem concerns on whether or not hate speech premised on religious beliefs is considered a protected expression under the Free Speech and Free Exercise clauses of the Constitution. In approaching the issue concerned, the study utilized a qualitative comparative approach and the Habermasian Critical Discourse method to unpack the seemingly conflicting discourses and schools of thought that permeate the issue on hate speech. The findings of the study show that the limitations on the exercise of both rights as laid down in statutes and jurisprudence have been carefully and strictly carved out to ensure that free speech and religious liberty are secured under utmost possible measures. This study follows an understanding of the hate speech dilemma through a paradigm that views hate speech as an assault on the dignity of the individual or group that it targets. In this regard, the ongoing libertarian-egalitarian debate provided the necessary legal and philosophical frameworks. A critical discourse analysis of the issue shows that there are inadequacies in using an originalist-libertarian approach towards hate speech especially on its lack of emphasis on the harmful effects of hate speech. Hence, this study proposes an alternative 'balancing' test grounded on a rights-based approach which synthesizes a workable solution on striking a balance between securing the liberties to free speech and religious expression while protecting affected communities from hate speech.
541			_xBaldomero Estenzo _yLaw _zLaw
546			_aEnglish
942			_2ddc _cTHE
998			_cjesstony [new] _d1/25/2017
998			_cAillen[checked] _d10/12/2017
999			_c6729 _d6729