|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Dec 12, 2019 14:04:56 GMT
Tomorrow is the last day you can make a submission to the public consultation on the introduction of "hate speech" legislation. You can do so here. Here is my contribution, which I put on my blog as well. |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Dec 12, 2019 14:40:55 GMT
Maolsheachlann that was a powerful piece. I had meant to submit an objection to this terrible law but laziness and other distractions have prevented me. I might try before closing time.
Reading your submission I had the thought I wish I had written that! I hope it has some impact. Well done again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Dec 12, 2019 14:47:33 GMT
Maolsheachlann that was a powerful piece. I had meant to submit an objection to this terrible law but laziness and other distractions have prevented me. I might try before closing time. Reading your submission I had the thought I wish I had written that! I hope it has some impact. Well done again. Thank you! I imagine they have their plains laid already, but if there is a sufficient outcry, they may think twice. |
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Dec 12, 2019 14:59:31 GMT
Very good. Exemplary to actually make the effort to write such sane comments on important issues like this. Free speech are really paramount in any culture higher than Orwell. The nearest thing to Freedom itself. Nothing to treat plain silly brainless either by draconic legislation or socially, and truly worth fighting for!
|
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Dec 12, 2019 15:15:41 GMT
Very good. Exemplary to actually make the effort to write such sane comments on important issues like this. Free speech are really paramount in any culture higher than Orwell. The nearest thing to Freedom itself. Nothing to treat plain silly brainless either by draconic legislation or socially, and truly worth fighting for! Thanks Tomas! |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Dec 12, 2019 17:29:30 GMT
I took the survey instead which is offered as an instant option. All 5 questions are biased in favour of a change in the law. One asks what groups do you think receive hate speech and need protection. I objected to the question and pointed out Ireland has never been as tolerant. Indeed we self police and censor ourselves constantly.
I objected to another question saying what restrictions do we need on free speech by saying only direct incitement to violence or criminal damage should be illegal.
I said the Gardai should be after real criminals not persecuting controversial or even unpleasant opinions.
In my final answer I expressed my anger that we were even contemplating restricting a precious liberty. Free speech protects minorities. We have too much conformity already and this will only reinforce that stifling tendency which is harming democratic debate and undermining holding our political masters to account. I suggested they be really radical and pass a law protecting Free Speech.
|
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Dec 12, 2019 19:39:29 GMT
Just made a submission.
It could be argued that every crime or incitement to violence, by definition, is caused by hatred anyway, this is why a person commits these crimes. Therefore to add another level of legislation to deal with ‘hate crime’ for example is a redundant factor. All crimes, since time began, contain, in essence, a form of hatred or severe disregard for the victim. This is in-built. Having secondary ‘hate’ legislation is cosmetic and will cause all sorts of problems of definition and interpretation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Dec 12, 2019 19:43:33 GMT
I took the survey instead which is offered as an instant option. All 5 questions are biased in favour of a change in the law. One asks what groups do you think receive hate speech and need protection. I objected to the question and pointed out Ireland has never been as tolerant. Indeed we self police and censor ourselves constantly. I objected to another question saying what restrictions do we need on free speech by saying only direct incitement to violence or criminal damage should be illegal. I said the Gardai should be after real criminals not persecuting controversial or even unpleasant opinions. In my final answer I expressed my anger that we were even contemplating restricting a precious liberty. Free speech protects minorities. We have too much conformity already and this will only reinforce that stifling tendency which is harming democratic debate and undermining holding our political masters to account. I suggested they be really radical and pass a law protecting Free Speech. Couldn´t be better said Cato. |
|
|
|
Post by Tomas on Dec 12, 2019 19:46:20 GMT
Just made a submission. It could be argued that every crime or incitement to violence, by definition, is caused by hatred anyway, this is why a person commits these crimes. Therefore to add another level of legislation to deal with ‘hate crime’ for example is a redundant factor. All crimes, since time began, contain, in essence, a form of hatred or severe disregard for the victim. This is in-built. Having secondary ‘hate’ legislation is cosmetic and will cause all sorts of problems of definition and interpretation. Not only cosmetic but one made up all but entirely of poison components? |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Dec 14, 2019 18:34:04 GMT
There were 3 arrests around rival demonstrations outside the Dail today. On the RTE website a masked AntiFa group were photographed but not identified. They and another small group were protesting about hate speech. According to the account , union , immigrant and Faith groups were protesting about the rise in hate speech. Strange how no "faith" groups protest about restrictions on free speech but then churches tend to only get exercised nowadays by liberal leftist issues.
Opposing them were the Irish Freedom party and I think some of Gemma O Doherty's supporters alarmed at the proposed new laws. I 'll have a look at how RTE news reported this on air later.
|
|
