Hate Speech Bill

[ladiesman217]

Worth a watch:



Below is a short interview of Minister for Justice, Helen McEntee, saying "most people do want hate speech law". Really? Cos I've yet to meet one person who agrees with this. Didn't good old Leo himself there a few weeks back disregard a public consultation with over 70% being opposed to this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRZH-B6FX7I [can only embed one video at a time]

Nothing nor nobody in this world should be immune from criticism, without exception. Everyone is entitled to voice their opinions. Not one person, not one side has all the answers. Silencing opinions leads down a very dark road, one that the world has seen many times before and still does - North Korea, China, etc. There is a big difference between hate speech, and speech that YOU hate. Nothing in this world is just 'black and white', and the same goes for speech. Helen McEntee flaunts this bill as being about curbing hatred, but in reality I am convinced it's nothing more than curbing freedom of expression, freedom of thought.

As Voltaire once said: "I disapprove of what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

[EscortInspector]

Hall, E. B. (1906). The Friends of Voltaire (pp. 198-199). London: Smith, Elder & Co.

https://archive.org/details/cu319240.../n227/mode/2up

[FredBiscuits]

I am, and always have been all for free speech.

I do think it is something that always needs to be looked at, and reassessed at all times though. We are in an era where, not necessarily hate speech, but rather malicious speech is way more powerful than it should be. And there is no way you can convince a cohort of people that it is incorrect, and they were duped. Look at the damage former Doctor Andrew Wakefield did? The planet is going to go through an era of devastation, because people with a vested interest have sown so many lies in the minds of idiots, that nothing was done, or now can be done.

[EscortInspector]

[FredBiscuits]

Mister Mill lived in a time before the Internet.

[WellDressed]

Hate speech laws are a Trojan horse to stamp out future dissent.

I think every normal person knows hate speech is vile, that not up for debate. But governments regulating speech is a form of control. China brought in similar laws in 1997, these laws were never used in the way they said they would be, rather used as a form of control to keep people in check that spoke out against the regime.

Hate speech needs to be regulated by everyone without laws in place, if someone says something vile you call it and shun that person, common sense.

Governments are not your friend and are not doing this to help anyone but themselves, they see the opportunity.

[SteveB]

Big difference between criticism and hate speech.

"The Jewish Religion is stupid" is criticism and an opinion. A very crude and unsophisticated criticism and opinion, but criticism and opinion nevertheless.

"All Jews should be shot" is clearly hate speech.

Ireland is one of few western countries that does not have hate speech laws, and crimes that are motivated by hate are not even recorded in statistics.

[FredBiscuits]

But governments regulating speech is a form of control. China brought in similar laws in 1997, these laws were never used in the way they said they would be, rather used as a form of control to keep people in check that spoke out against the regime.

Hate speech needs to be regulated by everyone without laws in place, if someone says something vile you call it and shun that person, common sense.

We can all jump to the worst possible examples to attempt to prove a point, but mostly these are just straw-men arguments. Plenty of countries who have hate speech laws, and have had them for decades, have freedoms of criticism, protest, and civil discourse enshrined elsewhere in their laws. France has hate speech laws for the last 50 years. They seem to do alright on the criticism and protest front.

Shunning, criticism, and full-on reasoned debate has lost it's effectiveness in recent decades. Think about the things that certain political figures, lobby groups, "think tanks", literal hate groups have been able to say and do over the last 20 years, that would have rightfully ended a career in most times between the enlightenment and recent years? Yet they still have enough supporters who refuse to believe anything that is said about them, and believe everything they say no matter how untrue it is shown to be.

My core, "perfect world" belief was always that you allow hateful people a platform, and then debate them into a point of ridicule. That way you shouldn't have people saying "Oh, they aren't giving them a platform, so they must be scared and there must be some truth in what that person is saying". But unfortunately that just doesn't work anymore.

[WellDressed]

We can all jump to the worst possible examples to attempt to prove a point, but mostly these are just straw-men arguments. Plenty of countries who have hate speech laws, and have had them for decades, have freedoms of criticism, protest, and civil discourse enshrined elsewhere in their laws. France has hate speech laws for the last 50 years. They seem to do alright on the criticism and protest front.

Shunning, criticism, and full-on reasoned debate has lost it's effectiveness in recent decades. Think about the things that certain political figures, lobby groups, "think tanks", literal hate groups have been able to say and do over the last 20 years, that would have rightfully ended a career in most times between the enlightenment and recent years? Yet they still have enough supporters who refuse to believe anything that is said about them, and believe everything they say no matter how untrue it is shown to be.

My core, "perfect world" belief was always that you allow hateful people a platform, and then debate them into a point of ridicule. That way you shouldn't have people saying "Oh, they aren't giving them a platform, so they must be scared and there must be some truth in what that person is saying". But unfortunately that just doesn't work anymore.

You use France as an example.

Should a comedian be arrested for making fun of Mohammad? That is a real world case.

Brushing aside actual examples of this being used as a tool by governments as "strawman" is a cop out. It's not like the entirety of the western world just two years ago threatened people's livelihoods on the conditions that they need to get a vaccination is it? Restricted you movements to 5km of your house, not allowed drink in pubs unless you order chicken nuggets...... But they'll never try that again. Rules that are still in place in China and guess what laws they use to silence people who speak out?

If you need a government to regulate what you think is right and wrong you have bigger problems than what other people say. And if you think that the government is altruistic in their intentions I've got a bridge to sell you.

Governments are excellent at this, "hate speech law" name it something that everyone will agree is detestable then pass it as law. Oh you are against the "don't kill puppies law" you monster.

You are also insinuating that people are too stupid to know right from wrong, there will always be a hateful minority, do you think that regulating their speech will change that? No, it won't but this law will then be in place for everyone, there will come a time that the government will want to do something that you don't agree with then all of a sudden the law you championed will be used against you. You'll be shocked that this has happened and never seen it coming.

[EscortInspector]

...Ireland is one of few western countries that does not have hate speech laws, and crimes that are motivated by hate are not even recorded in statistics.

I really expected better from you, in fact I'm willing to concede you probably had a stroke towards the end of your post.
This is just factually incorrect! Ireland has Hate Speech laws on the books since 1989 and the Garda Síochána have stats on crime motivated by hate and non-crimes motivated by hate (frankly non-crimes are none of the Gardaí's fucking business ).

Prohibition of Incitement To Hatred Act, 1989
https://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/.../en/print.html

An Garda Síochána – 2021 Hate Crime Data and Related Discriminatory Motives
https://www.garda.ie/en/about-us/our...y-motives.html

Looking forward to your apology for misinformation/disinformation; more mental gymnastics (the current legislation is not fit for purpose/they only began recording statistics recently etc etc.) or an appeal to free speech to avoid apologising