Here we go again. The first ad from the #LoveisLove crowd http://youtu.be/8r8d63cQANc on the Religious Discrimination Bill. Apparently my right to freely associate and speak my mind is to be trumped by their "right" to unconditional love and approval.

Time for the adults to speak up in this debate. People have a right to disapprove of you and your lifestyle, no matter how hurt you might be about it.

The only people wanting to divide the community are the LGBTIQ+ lobby with their disrespectful "phobic" labels and demands that everyone see the world the way they do.

People have a right to their own moral views, and they have a right to exercise those in community, if they want. If they can't hire staff as teachers, say, who refuse to teach those views, then how do they transmit them? And wouldn't they be producing an institution that is schizophrenic and dysfunctional if they couldn't select staff who agreed with their ethos?

Next we'll be telling political parties that they have to hire anyone who applies, irrespective of whether they agree with the aims of the party or not.

If people feel they can give me a "free character assessment", then I should be able to do that back to them, no matter their sexual orientation or gender dysphoria.

Has anybody noticed how our fundamental social practices now mirror wider global patterns and that the idea of free speech is constrained by interracial and intercultural relationships that are constantly monitored by elites? A big Aussie 'Ni Hao!' to ya all.

Dear Graham,

«and they have a right to exercise those in community»

But there lies the problem: the moment you mention (as something that truly exists, rather than within a joke or as an imagination) the word "community", then you have accepted communist propaganda. If there indeed is a community, which you freely accepted to be part of, then that community has every right to limit what is done or said within it, on its own premises.

What should be made clear to all, is that the state is NOT a community, because it never asked for, not received the consent of the people who live within its claimed territory to be a part thereof. Had that been the case, then I would see no reason to object to the community's demands, for example, that everyone within it should unconditionally love and approve everyone else.

Meanwhile, until this underlying issue is resolved, of which the topic of this thread is only a tiny tip of the iceberg, there should be a clear distinction between private space and public (or communal) space.

In one's private space (and in one's friend's space, if they approve), one should be able to speak their mind freely, employ only whoever they want and discriminate as much as they like (even in the negative sense of that word, because according to dictionary, discrimination is actually a very good thing: "recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another" / "the ability to judge what is of high quality; good judgement or taste"). In public/communal space, however, that is on public premises (including virtual premises), it is legitimate for the public that owns the premises to set its rules and limitations, including on free speech, so anyone who freely accepted to belong in that "community" has no basis to complain.

Thankfully, OLO is a private space, yours, in which you permitted us to express our views freely with extremely minimal limitations.

I must agree, as long as that freedom is mine too.
Doubt the E-tube mentioned in the end has much power, but aware the bill has opponents
Warned it would not be easy in a thread I posted, then in someone else's thread
We will be talking about much of next year
But freedom of speech is for all sides all views even if we do not like them

If lawyers had their way they would be the only ones allowed to express a view. At a price that is!

People who do not discriminate are zombies. We discriminate all day every day between things we like and things we don't like; people we like and people we don't like. Irrespective of any laws that politicians want to create I, for instance, will always be against homosexuality, Islam, multiculturalism and certain people whom I do not believe are suitable people to live among us. And, the moaners and groaners who appear on the Youtube clip, are most certainly discriminating against other people by by alluding that they have no right to an opinion of their deviant behaviour. Not satisfied with being able to do what they want, they now want affirmation that their behaviour is right and proper, when the science so popular to them in other matters clearly says that it is not right, proper or natural.