ification, subjugation, and eradication?" McMasters asks the question if it matters whether the speech occurs face to face, online, in a book, on the television, in the lyrics of music, in the classroom, and even in a political campaign? Can we simply define hate speech as a list of words or does the context count? McMasters (1999) final question on trying to define hate speech really brings out the whole debate, because it asks the question of, "Is hate speech determined by the intent of the speaker, or the reaction of the audience."
             In order to get a grasp on hate speech, one must take a close look at Free Speech. In order to do this it is important to know the policies and objectives of
             the first amendment. Thomas I. Emerson (1970) has summarized four essential values served by the constitutional protection of free expression and free speech:
             First, freedom of expression is essential as a means of assuring individual self-fulfillment. The proper end of a man is the realization of his character and the potentialities as a human being. For the achievement of this self-realization the mind must be free. Hence suppression of belief, opinion or other expressions an affront to the dignity of a man, essentially a negation of man's essential nature....Second, freedom of expression is an essential process for discovering knowledge and truth. An individual who seeks knowledge and truth must hear all sides of the question, consider all alternatives, test his judgment by exposing it to the opposition, and make full use of different minds.....
             Third, freedom of expression is essential to provide for participation in decision making by all members of a society. This is particularly significant for political decisions. . .
             Finally, freedom of expression is a method of achieving a more adaptable and hence a more stable community, of maintaining, the precarious balance between healthy cleavage and necessary consensus....