Hate Speech Bill

[FredBiscuits]

I quite clearly laid out how this will affect everyone in the future.

And people here have pointed out to you that this is, more often than not, not shown to be the case. Many countries with hate speech laws still rank very highly on any Freedom Index produced. Conversely, there are many countries without hate speech laws where freedoms are otherwise massively restricted.

You are acting exactly like the people I mentioned above who will not change their opinions, even when it is pointed out to them how they are incorrect. It's pure confirmation bias of ignoring any bit of information that doesn't conform to your firmly held opinions. You then go on to get defensive, saying that people are calling you a Nazi/white supremacists/etc and confidently tell people exactly what is going to happen (despite the majority of the evidence being that it likely won't happen), and vaguely point to people being "wrong about everything" in the last 3-4 years.

It's exactly what I was talking about that the ability to have debate, or change anyone's mind once it is made up, is gone. This is what is different in the modern era. Whoever gets to someone first, to influence their opinion, permanently has their ally to the cause.

[Notabot]

I dont agree with most of what the government do but this bill is needed. If you think you'll be in some way opressed by it then you need to ask yourself some questions.
This bill will be used as a protection tool, not a proactive militant free speech deterrent.
At the moment, the trans community, a very small and exposed community, are being denied their very existence by 'free speech' warriors.
They are very free to call trans men and women paedophiles to stir up hatred and this can go unpunished, that's wrong.
It won't affect me or most of the people I know but it will outlaw the really clear examples of hatred being peddled, especially in the online world.
The only way to approach this one is to look in the mirror and ask "what scenario would i be negatively impacted by this bill?"
And then untwist your knickers and cop the fuck on.
By the way, the senator with the biggest problem with this bill is Ronan Mullen, and in 2018 he pushed and voted to retain the blasphemy law in the Irish constitution so he is talking out of both sides of his mouth.
He's also a massive fucking penis (that is a personal opinion which i will still be able to make without persecution after this law is passed).

You are using the trans community to justify this bill?. Can I ask you where do you draw the line on what is and isn't hate speech in regard the trans community?. I recently viewed a clip on YouTube where the guy says if you put 100 women and 10 men on a island in a hundred years you'll have a vibrant community of men women and children. If you put 100 trans women and 10 men on a different island in 100 year you'll find the bodies of 110 mens. The first example is sustainable living, the 2nd isn't.
Now would you regard that as hate speech or a fact of science?.
He got a lot of hate for let's be honest stating a scientific fact.

[Rooney2808]

I think we need effective hate speech laws but I don't think this bill is the way to go about it.
My 2 cents on it.

[WellDressed]

And people here have pointed out to you that this is, more often than not, not shown to be the case. Many countries with hate speech laws still rank very highly on any Freedom Index produced. Conversely, there are many countries without hate speech laws where freedoms are otherwise massively restricted.

You are acting exactly like the people I mentioned above who will not change their opinions, even when it is pointed out to them how they are incorrect. It's pure confirmation bias of ignoring any bit of information that doesn't conform to your firmly held opinions. You then go on to get defensive, saying that people are calling you a Nazi/white supremacists/etc and confidently tell people exactly what is going to happen (despite the majority of the evidence being that it likely won't happen), and vaguely point to people being "wrong about everything" in the last 3-4 years.

It's exactly what I was talking about that the ability to have debate, or change anyone's mind once it is made up, is gone. This is what is different in the modern era. Whoever gets to someone first, to influence their opinion, permanently has their ally to the cause.

What utter shite Fred you pick one line then go on a tirade about how I'm just like the people you were talking about, do you lack complete and utter self awareness? Your mind is made up, you gonna change it? Smfh

I wasn't going on the defensive, he directed a post to ME.

Maybe you will be able to answer this where is the line drawn in relation to this law? It has been written to be purposely vague so what's the cut off point? You conveniently skipped that part while having a good stroke about how you are right.

[WellDressed]

"Once a government is committed to the principle of
silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down
the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of
terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear."
Harry S. Truman

[FredBiscuits]

Your mind is made up, you gonna change it? Smfh

You see the multiple posts above where I said I used to be an believer in absolute free speech, but have in recent times changed my mind when alternative evidence has become apparent? That's where I show that my mind is open to change based on the situation.

As to where I would draw the line, I would probably look at the best international examples, like Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia (and so on), all of who have effective hate speech legislation and permanent fixtures in the top 10 countries in every freedom index.

[FredBiscuits]

"Once a government is committed to the principle of
silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down
the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of
terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear."
Harry S. Truman

That the same Harry Truman who locked up 100,000 Japanese people in internment camps?

[WellDressed]

You see the multiple posts above where I said I used to be an believer in absolute free speech, but have in recent times changed my mind when alternative evidence has become apparent? That's where I show that my mind is open to change based on the situation.

As to where I would draw the line, I would probably look at the best international examples, like Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia (and so on), all of who have effective hate speech legislation and permanent fixtures in the top 10 countries in every freedom index.

That's not an answer, where's the line?

A trans activist calls a priest a pedo? Is that arrestable?

A comedian tells an offensive joke? Is that arrestable?

What about a kid saying something offensive online? kids are dumb and don't know any better some times. Should they be arrested and have the same punishment as an adult?

What if you offend someone by following the wrong religion?

Can you be arrested for saying there's no god?

Trying to figure out a cut of point here.

Let's not forget that old handbag mcentee already insinuated that if you're against this law it is akin to hate speech.

Oops was what I said about her hate speech?!?

What's the bar here?

A lesbian woman from Norway was threatened with JAIL for saying men can't be lesbians....

[WellDressed]

That the same Harry Truman who locked up 100,000 Japanese people in internment camps?

Jesus learn some history, Roosevelt wrote the order to lock them up, Truman wrote the order to free them

[FredBiscuits]

Is that what she said, or did she go after a specific person on Facebook? Or did you not get that far in the story?