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 > How to fix 18C without having to repeal it > Comments

How to fix 18C without having to repeal it : Comments

By John de Meyrick, published 15/11/2016

So, for example, if it were unlawful to offend, insult or humiliate a person on the grounds of age, then someone who might call his neighbour a

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All
'Then we shall see who opposes it and thus are supporters of hounding Students and Cartoonists..'

did not the French cartonnist learn that
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 15 November 2016 11:54:02 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
Mayan apparently believes it's only the 'right' that 'hurls insults'. He is either very naive, or he is just another Lefty.
Posted by ttbn, Tuesday, 15 November 2016 2:04:18 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 Turnbull is no longer trying to appease the abc at every turn. His new found conservatism gives hope that 18c will end up in the bin.How beautiful to see the squirming. Malcolm Abbott is finally starting to excel. Maybe after 18c goes he might even do some cuts to our national broacaster propaganda machine along with the socialist controlling the Human Rights commission. Pauline must try and hide her delight.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 15 November 2016 2:35:02 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
Hi Mayan,

As you say,

"It's odd that the libel law, which so many thin-skinned politicians use for personal enrichment, is ignored when the issue of freedom of speech is raised. A campaign for the right to hurl insults at others doesn't seem likely to gain widespread, passionate support."

Yes, if 18 (c) were revised, or even removed, there would still be laws against libel, slander, defamation and incitement (i.e. 'Behead all those who insult the prophet', that sort of vile hate speech). Those laws have been on the books, via English common and equity law, for hundreds of years.

So people have been hurling what other people may have considered to be 'insults' for a hell of a long time. I hope that they continue to do so, in a robust, open society.

And thanks for giving me the opportunity to use the boo-words 'hate speech', which themselves seem to be designed to shut down free speech. Maybe the phrase should be made illegal, since it incites people to oppose the proper, full development of free speech for fear of being on the wrong side :)

After all, 'hate' is not the issue: my mum loved me, but she didn't hold back from giving me a good clip around the ear if I deserved it. It didn't mean that she hated me, although it often felt like it. We criticise the idiot behaviour of our friends, in order to bring them back to better behaviour - it doesn't mean we 'hate' them. We may not criticise the stupid behaviour of people whom we don't like much, let them to it, we think, stupid bastards. So criticise your friends, and let your enemies sink into their own mess.

Criticism good, silence bad, Mayan.

Cheers,

Joe
Posted by Loudmouth, Wednesday, 16 November 2016 9:29:17 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
18C is fine as far as it goes - people have the right not to be insulted aggressively in public because of who they are and have been from conception and birth and not because of any decisions they have made. The author's rewording also seems fair enough.

What is very important is to make sure nobody gets to try to use it as a way of protecting a religion or racist claims of inborn ethnic supremacy.

Appeasers (e.g. in the ABC)of a certain vile international cult originating from a murderous desert bandit seek to protect the march of that cult under the banner of political correctness and to label overt hostility to its spread as "racism". It is not racism.

Nor is opposition to the racist pretensions of those who seek to protect an aggressive brand of racial supremacism by labelling its opponents as a antisemites.

To make sure the British law against racial abuse does not protect any religion the UK has added a Section 29J which states:

29J: "Nothing in this [Part] shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system."

It be valuable for Australia to adopt such a provision.
Posted by EmperorJulian, Monday, 21 November 2016 11:48:10 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. All

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