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 > The things we aren't allowed to say > Comments

The things we aren't allowed to say : Comments

By Brendan O'Reilly, published 11/11/2016

These days populist (and often official) attitudes on these topics have been largely reversed, and those who argue against 'progressive' views risk being labelled misogynist, homophobic, or racist.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Well said, Brendan, particularly your closing proposition:
"Freedom of expression should be one of the most basic human rights of all. Currently, many people are reluctant to speak out in politically correct debates, and feel that they can only hold an unfashionable view in private."

Unless you agree to be 'one of the mob' there should be no differences between how you express your views in private, compared to what you say in public.

Much political correctness is hypocrisy - a willingness to conform, and its intent needs to be scrutinised.
Thanks to articles such as Brendan's this is happening, but the scrutiny should be more widespread.
Posted by Ponder, Friday, 11 November 2016 7:16:22 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
oh dear

PC advocates talk up the virtues of Islam to the point of denying any links with terrorism, sometimes vilifying those of contrary view.
how about

PC advocates talk up the virtues of Catholicism to the point of denying any links with terrorism, sometimes vilifying those of contrary view.

Remember the troubles? the fact that religion is used to motive people on what is largely grabs power is nothing new. Oh and this view isn't a left or right thing you'll find many on the right with longer memories who think the same.
Posted by Cobber the hound, Friday, 11 November 2016 8:17:16 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
Translated, "back in the good old days we could call women whores and sluts in public, Abos as sub-human scum, pooftahs as .. well pooftahs who should die".

Because that that is what these people really mean when they say 'political correctness has ran wild'.

I always challenge such people to state for the record 'what do you think you are not allowed to say'?

One problem these people have is that many of their so called 'opinions' (translated bigotry) have been refuted by scientific facts.

Take this example:
"There is PC pressure to only discuss homosexuality in a positive light (viewed as part of normal behaviour). A form of moral blackmail (promoting the prospect of LGBTI suicides) was used to help bring about the abandonment of the same-sex marriage referendum."

But the real facts are, apart from the impacts of discrimination and prejudice, LGBTI people have been proven to be just the same as anyone else, as just as good (or bad), make just as good citizens and parents and all the rest. To say otherwise is disproven and debunked bigotry.

And it was proven that mental health stress rose when horrible vilification increased (suicide help lines reported a huge increase)over the marriage equality so called 'debate'.

Let me remind people that that 'debate' included calling LGBTI people paedophiles, rapists, child abusing parents, sick, deluded and all the sorry rest.

So what does he not feel free to state except outright disproven debunked lies?
Because in the end that what it comes down to, wanting the 'right' to lie about and vilify people that they are prejudiced against and them not being able to answer back.

It is a form of cowardly bullying they want, to be able to harm people, stir up prejudice even violence ..with no come back on them.

Because people like that do not like people arguing back at them, they clutch their pearls and scream 'I'm being bullied and censored'. Just like every bully does when people fight back.
Posted by LisaM, Friday, 11 November 2016 8:20:11 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
The debate about the role of women in combat positions in the military has effectively been shut down by a combination of political correctness, decisions by politicians, and military discipline both here and overseas (despite dissent from many eminent current and former military personnel).

Well that's based on the generally universal idea that women should be treated equal to men and should have the same rights as men. The debate has been shut down it's more like that for the majority of us we position is the only logical position to take. If someone is physically capable of doing the job then why would it matter what their gender is?

If you want to argue that women should be treated differently to men then you'll need to come up with a really good reason.
Posted by Cobber the hound, Friday, 11 November 2016 8:21:36 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
It is considered poor form to make anything other than positive comments about women and designated disadvantaged groups. A form of (PC) reverse sexism has led to publicly sponsored ads and campaigns commonly presenting men negatively, while simultaneously presenting women either in positive roles or as victims of male behaviour.

I agree, but the answer isn't to go on the attack, we need to remind all that stereotyping people based on superficial factors such as race or gender is wrong and counter productive.
Posted by Cobber the hound, Friday, 11 November 2016 8:28:46 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
There is token (PC) use of sign language in public sector media events, despite most TV being subtitled, and there being only 9723 Auslan speakers recorded in the 2011 Census.There is an element of prohibition on humour concerning some PC topics (remember Alexander Downer and the "things that batter" joke).

Not sure were to start, how about I've only seen the use of sign language when there is a live news event generally for natural disasters. do you believe that deaf people should have to wait for the captioned version?
Posted by Cobber the hound, Friday, 11 November 2016 8:34:06 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
LisaM
In answer to your hysterical post, on the one hand you praise homosexuals as acting normally, and living as normal people in society, but then parade them as weak and in need of special help. Which one is it?
Your logic appears to me akin to anti Trump protest in USA, post election.
After all, it is homosexuals that are forcing the marriage equality demand on society.
Don't you believe in the adage like most normal folk, "if you can't stand the heat, don't stand by the fire"
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 11 November 2016 9:48:35 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
lets see the regressives who support planned parenthood rename babies fetus, butcher them by the millions (even selling their parts) and then call Trump supporters nazis. Oh what a warped world the regressives live in. No wonder they can't accept democracy.
Posted by runner, Friday, 11 November 2016 10:22:50 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
LisaM from your post, I don't think anyone could be much more bigoted than you. You show extreme bigotry in your promoting all the trendy waffle of the green blob, & extreme left. I'll bet you are a bigoted global warmer too.

Well love, we are claiming the right to be just as bigoted as you in the opinions we hold, & how we promote them. We won't however attempt to shut you down, you will always be welcome to voice your opinion here, & all the other right leaning blogs. This unlike the lefty blogs, that remove disagreement almost instantly, lest some of the lovies see the truth.

Meanwhile do join us in celebrating the Trumping of the much of the infection the green blob has inflected on us & the US.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 11 November 2016 10:47:15 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
The Greens/Labour/Turnbull show exactly why they don't want the people to decide whether to pervert the marriage act or not. They are very frightened the people will have their say despite the total indoctrination of the kids.
Posted by runner, Friday, 11 November 2016 11:00:42 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 can't add much to what LisaM and Cobber have contributed, except to say hear, hear and well said!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Friday, 11 November 2016 11:09:55 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
The problem with free speech is simply democracy as we have it now. It is impossible for a Government to arbitrate rights and wrongs, as believed in by an individual, and be sensible with outcomes of that arbitration.
There are things in personal life that have no place for Government interference.
Obviously, the rights of the individual should not extend to murdering a person of dislike. That is a good and practical law.
Minority groups making demands on government, is a healthy state for democracy, as we live it.
There should be freedoms to demonstrate against inequalities in society. But when minority groups manipulate the governing system, for their own selfish ends, democracy falls apart. It becomes overweighted with trivia, accordingly inflicted onto an otherwise compliant or disinterested society. Re 18c .
The antidote to the trivia of PC unfortunately, requires an equal counter movement, eg one nation, and a Donald Trump, to overthrow obsurdity, and strike a balance.
Democracy unfortunatly, is a wild horse, which will be compliant only in the hands of whomsoever owns the animal.
So the problem is not PC, it is who is at the controls of Democracy. Democracy and its influence on the individual line of thought, needs to be pegged back.
Sufficient laws exist to control public behaviour. Abuse is catered for under laws determining assault for example. What does it matter, the abuse is racially motivated; its inconsequential!
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 11 November 2016 11:39:01 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
Hey AlanB
Since it is not exposing any underlying secrets to say you were once Rhrosty, please assure me you are not also the poster girl, with strikingly similar views, "LisaM". She appears as a new recruit, I'm suspicious!
Posted by diver dan, Friday, 11 November 2016 12:17:20 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
It is very rude and cruel to say nasty things to people or other people cause, it hurts them badly even the gay man and lady should not be hurt by things said, by other people. You would not like it either yourself, so do not say bad things to other people or about other people ok.
Posted by misanthrope, Friday, 11 November 2016 12:50:53 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
For gods sake grow up misanthrope.

As kids we were taught to chant, "Sticks & stones may break my bones, but names can never hurt me". What has happened to the country when kids could handle an insult 40 years ago, but adults can't today?

Hell these things are often not insults, but proven fact. If they weren't the laws of libel would handle those merely out to denigrate. A prime instance of this was the Bolt case.

Funny isn't it, that those who don't want the truth told about some of the leaches in our midst, have been the ones hurling lies & innuendoes at one Donald Trump this last few months. Yet another instance of the left & their do as I say, not as I do. The left/green blob can't handle the truth, so want a law against it being aired.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 11 November 2016 1:44:49 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
So basically Lisa/Alan and Cobber think people should be restricted from saying things that they (Lisa/Alan/Cob) think is factually incorrect.

Somehow I think they've missed the point about free speech.
Posted by mhaze, Friday, 11 November 2016 4:12:01 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
How irresponsible and condemning of your opinion to talk about freedom of expression about race being curtailed by 18c but not mentioning the reasonable discussion afforded by 18d. Bolt was not an example of 18C but caught out by 18D because he propagated what he knew to be lies and that wasn't reasonable. Should liars with privileged access to expression be allowed to abuse people? And the QUT students is an example of what is not inhibited by 18C - don't make out they were prosecuted. And Bill leak is a case in progress. When it comes to what 18C actually does the evidence is very weak but here it was presented conclusively.

So why abuse your privileged position as a commentator and not mention 18D in an article of freedom of expression? Just another case of those who whine about lack of freedom of expression are those who are already more freely expressing than most that they denigrate. The uncomfortable truth that is hiding behind claims of political correctness is that these issues such as racism and genderism are now immoral rather than it being politically expedient - the law is merely reflecting and codifying that morality. Political correctness is what people do when they don't have the morality. It is morality that people most often use to shut down debate not laws. And that is why you didn't mention that reasonable debate on race is legal because morals determine more than the law.

In this digital age of fast information it is politically incorrect and even immoral to be wrong (on 18C and 18D) on the indefensible. (perhaps you take a two way bet with all the brackets - they are everywhere).
Posted by Eric G, Friday, 11 November 2016 4:51:27 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
Speaking of free (hate) speech why not google the topic Donald Trump and hate speech. It seems that Donald has given at least some people in the USA permission to freely express their hate speech, and actions too.
Posted by Daffy Duck, Friday, 11 November 2016 4:53:23 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
Political Correctness is code for tyranny. 18c is tyranny.
Posted by ttbn, Friday, 11 November 2016 5:11:30 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
give us a break Daffy. The left have been using hate speach for decades. Their doctrine dishes it out but then become sooks when truth is spoken. You aren't Triggs in disguise are you? To get to a place where a cartoon demontrating truth is criminalised shows how totalitarian the left are. Yet its ok for the degenerates on the abc to show Abbott having sex with a dog. You lot are really pathetic.
Posted by runner, Friday, 11 November 2016 5:13:15 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
It is worth noting that the author says of indigenous issues that "essentially a combination of political correctness, Section 18(c), and Indigenous solidarity have acted to suppress discussion of politically incorrect opinions". So why not free things up by mentioning the content of 18D and the exemptions to 18C?

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION ACT 1975 - SECT 18D
Exemptions: Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:
(a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or
(b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest; or
(c) in making or publishing: (i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or (ii) a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.
Posted by Eric G, Friday, 11 November 2016 5:18:52 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
well Eric it just shows that the Human Rights commission should be done away with as their judgement has proven pathetic to say the least. And to think we pay huge salaries to this mob who have told lies and misrepresented. No commonsense has prevailed.
Posted by runner, Friday, 11 November 2016 5:40:54 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
Leaving aside legal retribution for comments on controversial topics, anyone who does not totally support gay marriage, indigenous rights, the destruction of the traditional family, Safe Schools etc is automatically called names.
It's not a matter of saying nasty things, it's not a matter of insulting people or belittling them.
It's the inability to have an educated conversation regarding the issues without being labelled racist, homophobe etc.
Posting of official data and studies in these topics is met with derision and abuse. Try posting any article on the health dangers of anal sex and see what response you get. Link people to figures from government departments that show aboriginal people are less likely to die in prison than whites and you are accused of hating aboriginals.
Put up statistics about child abuse, neglect and violence towards aboriginal women and the result is the same.
No discussion about how to turn these things around, just a flow of foul accusations and personal abuse.
Posted by Big Nana, Saturday, 12 November 2016 11:55:27 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
you put things very graciously Big Nana. Thank you.
Posted by runner, Saturday, 12 November 2016 11:59:55 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
Interesting!

Being asked for costless common courtesy and civility has got far more folk stirred and shaken, up in arms and frothing at the mouth, than child abuse!

We have to know they're on the level when they froth equally from both sides of their physiognomy. Informative PRIORITIES!

I leave them guessing with an upturned smile that forces all the froth to the middle.
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Saturday, 12 November 2016 12:00:07 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
' A committee in Mexico's lower house of congress has voted down a proposal by President Enrique Pena Nieto to legalise same-sex marriage nationwide.

The measure seeking to enshrine in the constitution same-sex couples' right to '
wed was defeated 19 to 8 on Wednesday in the Commission on Constitutional Matters.
- See more at: http://www.skynews.com.au/news/world/sthamerica/2016/11/10/mexico-rejects-same-sex-marriage-proposal.html#sthash.H07Cijnh.dpuf

Hey why no mention on ' our ' abc?
Posted by runner, Saturday, 12 November 2016 12:24:48 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
This one never made MSM in this country either

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/10/16/tens-thousands-march-in-paris-against-same-sex-marriage.html
Posted by Big Nana, Saturday, 12 November 2016 2:34:49 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
Despite assumptions that political correctness is the product of tree-hugging progressives, many may be surprised that in fact it came from the right wing of the Reagan era.
It was a time when they thought that morality was beginning to slide and this was a way of maintaining some sort of control over how people behaved and (hopefully) thought.

Nevertheless it's just an overblown and over-hyped self-imposed restriction and given much more attention than it deserves.

Except for threatening and obscene displays of public language, I don't believe anybody has ever been arrested, convicted or even charged with the "crime" of Political Correctness.

I am still quite free to say offensive things to others in public and all it would do is say more about me than about my target.

We're coming up to the silly season where some people get all uppity about Christmas trees and Nativity scenes but all the alleged restrictions - and arguments - are made by misguided individuals "taking the law into their own hands" and not as a matter of legally enforced public policy.

Many still rant about 18C but never mention the provisions of 18D.
There is also a difference between illegality and criminality - two different things under the law.

Bolt was charged under 18C because he didn't meet the provisions of 18D but also for making deliberately false allegations. He has a very long history of this but on that occasion, somebody bothered to challenge him in Court and he was exposed.
Posted by rache, Saturday, 12 November 2016 4:44:39 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
I don't agree Rache.

The origins of political correctnees are subject to debate but most commentators date its origins much earlier than the 1980s (some date it as far back as WW1 while others suggest 1930s). In the Australian context we can certainly date key PC events. The Racial Discrimination Act dates from the Whitlam era (1975 to be exact).

So called "conservative correctness" did develop in the US as a reaction to political correctness around the time of the Reagan presidency. It was more associated with conservative jargon than anything else. It was not associated with legislated impediments to free speech, and has largely faded.

The main reason Bolt was charged under 18(c) was simply because the provision was there and a small group of people sought to use it to shut him up!
Posted by Bren, Saturday, 12 November 2016 6:18:02 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
//Try posting any article on the health dangers of anal sex and see what response you get.//

Widespread acceptance?

I think it's pretty much common wisdom these days that anal sex is risky. I think the problem you're encountering is more that you're posting articles about anal sex, and expecting people to accept them as arguments against gay marriage. And then when people say: "hang on, what does sex have to do with marriage? And what about the lesbians? I don't think they're as interested in anal sex as pornhub would have us believe." you get a bit stroppy that people can't see good common sense like you and accuse them of abusing you with political correctness.

This seems to be what most of this whining about political correctness boils down to: a certain breed of thin-skinned tory who get stroppy when lefties disagree with them. For heavens sake, they're lefties. Of course they're going to disagree with tories. That's what lefties are for.

If the tories don't like being disagreed with, there's a simple remedy that I dare not speak for fear I be accused of trying to 'silence the debate'. If that's not to their liking, I suggest that maybe they just get over this disproportionate sense of self-pity mixed with outrage they feel when people pour scorn on their opinions.

Because the thing is, if you go around offering up your opinions for public consideration, there'll always be somebody out there waiting with a nice big bucket 'o scorn to tip on them. I should know - much scorn has been poured over mine. I can't say it's done me any lasting damage, for opinions (including the scornful ones) aren't physical, tangible things.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Saturday, 12 November 2016 8:15:16 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
Much of the 'freedom of speech' and PC griping has been used by big 'C' Conservatives and nativists to stir things up, and also close down debate and analysis e.g. what do conservatives and nativists actually want, or want to say, apart from nasty things about minorities or anything they don't like? This is clouded out by constantly focusing upon what they 'don't like' aka Hanson, and recall Morrison feeble attempt at being the vicitim claiming he'd been called nasty things on Twitter.....

At another level, well understood by PR, pollsters, advertising, mainstream, alt media and political elites owned and nobbled by the establishment neo-lib elites, is that these issues help encourage puerile primary school yard like behaviour and raising of the emotions. On the other hand, mostly conservative and nativist elites squeal rather loudly if anyone ever calls them out, and then they play the victim, pot/kettle black?

Meanwhile, while the focus is upon what libertarian P J O'Rourke describes as cultural issues, the establishment elites carry on untroubled, real or functional policies on economics, taxation, infrastructure, health care, negative gearing etc. are ignored or buried, while also debasing govt. and politics.

Outcome after decades of conditioning are people of all political hues focused upon the self, wants, desires and fears; versus needs of an inclusive, relaxed and comfortable society through good govt. policy.

As Frontline said all those years ago on 'playing the race card' another cultural issue, it's about 'dividing the electorate and multiplying the vote'; while via character of Mike Moore displayed ignorance of racial dog whistling, representing too many of our often ageing media, political and business elites.
Posted by Andras Smith, Saturday, 12 November 2016 10:56:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is an aspect to the stifling of free speech that's generally legal, quite hard to argue against specifically but in my view troubling in the way can impact on the ability of some views to be aired in the public square.

Its the targeting of companies which advertise in media outlets which also publish views (whether as an editorial view or as part of covering a range of views).

Reading this morning that Lego wasn't be advertising in one major British outlet anymore and from what I could tell it read as though Lego had been the subject of a secondary campaign to pressure them not to do so because of the papers stance on child refugees.

Some time back as I understand it OLO advertisers were targeted in a campaign to try to get them to stop advertising on the site because views were published here which some in the same sex equality lobby did not want to be aired. In my view OLO has been outstanding in allowing competing view points to be aired. It also allows those view points to be challenged and dissected. In my view a far healthier option than attempts to suppress view points and create echo chambers.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Sunday, 13 November 2016 8:50:37 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
Toni , firstly I haven't used the anal sex issue in relation to gay marriage, it has been in relation to teachings in the Safe School program, with people automatically assuming I am a homophobe, instead of someone worried about health issues in young girls.
However, you are missing my whole point. Of course I don't expect people to automatically agree with me. I'm not looking for an echo chamber. I enjoy verbal sparring and I welcome any rational and reasoned debate on any topic.
What I'm referring to is not rational opposition, it's the spewing of total hatred and abuse towards anyone who doesn't have the same beliefs, the insulting labelling in an attempt to shut down people who want an educated discussion on important issues.
It's the verbal version of the riots and tantrums currently being thrown by the left because Trump won.
Posted by Big Nana, Sunday, 13 November 2016 11:54:37 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
Bren,

If it was an attempt to "silence" Bolt, he certainly made a lot of noise about it in his newspaper column, his TV and Radio programmes and his Blog.

Nine people complained and it was found he contravened the Racial Discrimination Act because he stated that ALL fair skinned (ie not black enough looking for him) aboriginals were "in it for the money".
In particular there were four newspaper columns that were deliberately targetting specific individuals under the same accusation.

It's like me calling him "a typical lying and biassed opportunist" as one thing but if I called him "a typical Dutch lying and biassed opportunist" it can be be seen as racial vilification against Dutch people.

In addition it was found he deliberately ignored all the evidence (that he knew) that contracted his published views and he thereby distorted the truth to push his personal agenda against specific individuals and an entire racial group.

It's a pity the complainants didn't request financial compensation as well as an apology.

It's nothing new for Bolt's style but it was the first time he was called out over it.

I suppose there are some people who want to protect the ability of him and others to do more of the same without fear of challenge.
Posted by rache, Sunday, 13 November 2016 3:37:28 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
Well here is something to really worry about.
In the Canadian Parliament;

"Now that Islamophobia has been condemned, this is not the end, but
rather the beginning." — Samer Majzoub, president of the Canadian Muslim Forum.
Majzoub is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.
unquote
It is their intention to take it further with the Canadian government
to make criticism of Islam illegal. There is a world wide movement to
ensure that any criticism is illegal.
How long before this argument appears in 18c hearings.

http://tinyurl.com/hu2zxny

Islamophoboia uses the suffix phobia ie an irrational fear as a way
of stopping free speach about Islam and terrorism.
A defence should be that the fear is not irrational. Islamists argue
that Islam is of peace and the terrorists are not Islamists.
Might be hard to deny that defence to a Frenchman.
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 13 November 2016 5:53:11 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
//What I'm referring to is not rational opposition, it's the spewing of total hatred and abuse towards anyone who doesn't have the same beliefs, the insulting labelling in an attempt to shut down people who want an educated discussion on important issues.//

Nah, that can't be right. Because by that definition, runner is the most politically correct man who ever lived.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Monday, 14 November 2016 4:57:28 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
The whole point of a civil society is that we don't go around saying exactly what we think. Nothing is to be gained by needlessly insulting another. Educated, civil debate, backed up with facts is certainly welcome and should be encouraged. But how many people are willing to go to the trouble to educate themselves and find the facts to support their position? Just stop and think where most people you know get their opinions from...
Posted by isprey, Monday, 14 November 2016 10:33:50 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
Isprey, I think you have missed the point.
The problem is that a problem cannot be discussed if the point you
make in the discussion upsets someone who does not even have to be in
the discussion.
That is what happened to Bill Leak the cartoonist.
Then in the QLD Uni case they did not even mention the offended
woman, they were complaining about University discrimination.

Then at least one of them was not notified of a reconciliation meeting
so because he was not at the meeting received a demand for $5000.

Frankly it sounds like extortion with menaces to me.
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 14 November 2016 2:32:24 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

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