88.        The issue at hand is whether each generation is blameworthy for the hateful words
and actions o' some of its members, and for the failure of others to denounce those
hateful words and actions, in my view, it does not make clear sense to hold a vague
abstraction like a generation responsible for anything. Nevertheless, each person has a
duty to resist hateful words and actions, and to speak out against them.
      Admittedly, up to a point we have no legal obligation to resist hateful words.
Given our First Amendament right of free speech, we are entitled to say whatever
hateful things we wish, as long as our words do not harass, slander, libel, incite to riot,
or otherwise cause significant harm. Even so, this legal entitlement does not absolve us
of deeper moral duties. For example, all persons are morally bound not to harm others,
and to se helpful where it is important and within our capacity. The rhetoric of hate
violates both these duties by promoting attitudes and social climates in which those who
are hated are refused help and often harmed.
      Not so clear is the issue of whether we also have a moral duty to denounce the
hateful rhetoric and conduct of others. I believe we do, for silence is perceived as tacit
approval or at least indifference. Seen this way, silence helps foster hateful attitudes and
related harm. In other words, not speaking out is just another way to fail in our
obligations to be helpful and not harmful. Moreover, as individuals we are able to speak
cut against hateful words and actions, in a variety of ways. By teaching tolerance to our
children, for example, we can help them understand and appreciate differences among
people, and therefore understand that hate-based responses to difference are simply
wrong.
      In sum, while it makes no sense to hold a generation responsible for anything as a
group, I agree that every individual bears responsibility for speaking out against hateful
words and behavior, as well as for resisting them.'