The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Indeed, Mr Abbott, Section 18C is 'clearly a bad law' > Comments

Indeed, Mr Abbott, Section 18C is 'clearly a bad law' : Comments

By Joshua Forrester, Lorraine Finlay and Augusto Zimmermann, published 6/5/2016

After all, international human rights law does not recognize a right not to be offended.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Hi Alan,

Common ? Moi ?! Well, yeah:

'How you going, you old bastard ?' There was a time when that greeting was - as intended - a mark of respect and affection.

I hate to disagree with anyone, as is probably well-known, but I'm not so sure that, as ttbn remarks, the 'real' pseudo-left are sooks - I think they know very well that there is a very soft market of ideas out there, (or a market for very soft ideas) and that many, particularly the hot-house Gen Y kiddies, can be marshalled to rise up in indignation, and then dissolve in angry tears, at any opinion which is other than their own.

In that sense, they are fertile ground for co-opting in the struggle against genuine democracy, and of common sense (to the extent that they overlap) - and a necessary part of their defence, a NECESSARY part, is the right - perhaps even the obligation to offend, to shake up the smug, self-righteous notions that anti-democrats so jealously guard, and their demands of others to toe some line.

Take, for example, the BS surrounding the myth of Indigenous Deaths in Custody: as was pointed out even before that Royal Commission got going, the proportion of deaths in custody who were Indigenous (22%) was slightly lower than the proportion of prisoners in custody who were Indigenous (23 % at the time).

Nowadays, twenty five years later, the numbers are respectively 23 % of deaths in custody, and 28 % in custody. Since I don't want Indigenous people dying at all if possible, I'm not inclined to jump to false conclusions which exaggerate Indigenous deaths, (Christ, there's enough of those already) but that doesn't seem to have ever bothered the pseudo-left. After all, the maxim is 'grab anything which can be used as a stick up the arse of the establishment and shove hard'.

Cheers, Alan.

P.S. Oops, I've probably offended someone. Well, stiff: grow a pair.
Posted by Loudmouth, Friday, 6 May 2016 3:33:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My problem is that what offends me is not taken into consideration.

There are lots of things that offend me. Political Correctness, Boilersuit Feminists who declare they hate men, yet; dress like men, have haircuts like men, speak like men & even smell like men. Now, that really offends me.

There are a myriad of other things as well.
Posted by Jayb, Friday, 6 May 2016 8:25:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Common sense is anything but common but arguably the rarest mental manifestation of all Joe.

We shouldn't dismiss toe jam too lightly given some of the finest wines from antiquity had their fermentation process started courtesy of that source of wild yeast; and mixed in as the grapes were trampled?

But for disgusting it's hard to go past earwax. Although as a kid I fell into a fresh and still warm cow pat, and then made the mistake of trying to lick my lips to clean them!

Even today some seventy years on, the still fresh memory starts me spitting incessantly and reaching for that tidal wave in the mouth, mouthwash.

My brother a bit of a card, inquired, did you see that Al? Pointing to the pat with a remarkably accurate reverse mold of my face imprinted in it. Remarking that my ("escape artist") facial contortions, were far more mobile and stretchy than he remembered. "Of course I saw it, I retorted, still spitting. Well why did you dive into it then? he laughed.

I replied, well bro, did you think I was going to choose one of those nearby boulders as a three point nose dive emergency landing strip, when I had a softer option, I replied.

As an aside it stained my light skin a deep golden brown (heaven only knows what Farmer brown, pun intended, was feeding his Swiss browns) that took around three weeks (freckle face) to completely scrub off!

So it was not all bad and served me in later years when I needed to blend in very rapidly with others of a similar hue. Fresh Buffalo pats produce similar results and taste no better, nor do the (oh yuk thpith thipt) thousand or two flies that came with it. Kill one and a thousand come to the funereal!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Saturday, 7 May 2016 9:05:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I dont believe any of these race discrimation laws exist for their claimed purpose.

Race laws are, in my opinion, a pretext to suppress free freedom of speech which part of the NWO agenda. They are a form of subversion.
Posted by Referundemdrivensocienty, Saturday, 7 May 2016 12:44:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The problem with 18C is not in its prohibition to offend, insult and humiliate others in public places, but rather in its inappropriate extension of the word "public".

It is reasonable for a society to create a safe space in its public domain, a space where one may not be hurt, either physically or emotionally. This is plain decency and has nothing to do with race.

However, 18C wrongly pushes itself into the private arena by defining:

{"public place" includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, whether express or implied and whether or not a charge is made for admission to the place.}

Anyone should be able to make their own rules on their private property. Those who voluntarily enter should be aware that as they cross the threshold, it's the owner's rules that apply rather than the state's.

An obvious example is this OLO: this is the domain of Graham Young and he alone should set the rules here. Whether, when and on what grounds we are allowed to offend, insult or humiliate other members and readers, should be entirely up to him.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Sunday, 8 May 2016 9:43:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If the Parliamentary Research Group knew that 18c was unconstitutional 20 years ago, why is it only now that we the public are being told of it? Why was it never brought up in any of the media discussions about this issue? There appears to be a conspiracy between our elected representatives, the media, and the legal profession, to keep the public ignorant of what our "superiors" think the public should not know.

For twenty years, people in authority knew that 18c was unconstitutional, and they did nothing. For twenty years, there was in fact a coup against Australian democracy carried out by people who consider the Australian constitution, free speech and democracy, to be inconveniences to the world that they wish to build.

I really don't care if the Human Rights push consider freedom of speech to be right or wrong. Australia is a sovereign country and our laws are not going to be dictated to by a bunch of unrepresentative swill who nobody in this country voted for. You can bet that all of the publically funded Human Rights lawyers knew that 18c was unconstitutional but they kept their mouths shut. Freedom of speech is just another one of their sacred principles that they are willing to ignore whenever they feel that multiculturalism, and their fantasy of a world without borders, is under threat.

If 18c is unconstitutional, and people in authority knew it all along, those people should be identified and prosecuted. The charge should be "treason."
Posted by LEGO, Monday, 9 May 2016 3:37:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy