Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 
Send Topic Print
Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People (Read 2459 times)
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 57504
Gender: male
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #105 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 7:41pm
 
Mr Hammer wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 6:56pm:
Ye Grappler wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 6:51pm:
I tend to agree with Gandalf there - that tweet was not a slight on ANZAC - perhaps in poor taste, but not a slight...
Muslims hold the prophet dearly. That's why they rioted and murdered with a silly cartoon. Australians hold ANZAC Day very dearly because with many people it's intertwined with family both deceased and alive. For a Muslim (who aren't popular at the moment) to use the words about not forgetting our war dead to make a political swipe at our country pissed people off. They are similar incidents.


there was no swipe at our country you cretin.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:32pm by John Smith »  

REPORTER: The condition of the budget will not be an excuse for breaking promises?

TONY ABBOTT: Exactly right. We will keep the commitments that we make.
 
IP Logged
 
gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 14823
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #106 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:09pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 6:51pm:
Gandalf I recall you were opposed to 18c. Yet you support the Victorian legislation that Blair Cottrel is being charged with. As far as I can tell, the Victorian legislation is worse. What makes you support it but not 18c?


18c is clumsily worded, but I'm not really opposed to it for the simple reason that I don't think its ever really caused actual violations of anyone's free speech - with the possible exception of holocaust deniers, but that I attribute to a very powerful lobby that is prepared to chase anyone to the ends of the earth who speaks out against the holocaust - rather than the actual legislation.

At the end of the day, on the few occasions 18c was actually invoked, the courts seem to have got it right in terms of protecting freedoms. I doubt that in the history of 18c anyone has actually been punished for causing mere offense on racial grounds. In spite of what the legislation says, judges have consistently demonstrated their unwillingness to rule against people's freedom on the mere basis of causing offense. The only example the critics seem to be able to come up with was the Queensland University case - which was thrown out anyway. I don't think anyone is even bothering to hold up Andrew Bolt as a martyr his defeat anymore over - probably because people finally understand that he didn't lose for causing offense per se, but for lying, and effectively defaming a group of Aborigines (he would have lost a defamation case, which would have benefited the claimants a lot more monetarily).

As for the Victorian legislation, I have no idea what it says - but on this occasion, yes its true I don't think it was wrong to charge that clown over a violent and clearly intimidatory video.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 36802
I like fish
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #107 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:40pm
 
Quote:
18c is clumsily worded, but I'm not really opposed to it for the simple reason that I don't think its ever really caused actual violations of anyone's free speech - with the possible exception of holocaust deniers, but that I attribute to a very powerful lobby that is prepared to chase anyone to the ends of the earth who speaks out against the holocaust - rather than the actual legislation.


Sounds like you are having a bet each way.

Quote:
In spite of what the legislation says, judges have consistently demonstrated their unwillingness to rule against people's freedom on the mere basis of causing offense.


Except for holocaust deniers?

Quote:
I don't think anyone is even bothering to hold up Andrew Bolt as a martyr his defeat anymore over - probably because people finally understand that he didn't lose for causing offense per se, but for lying, and effectively defaming a group of Aborigines (he would have lost a defamation case, which would have benefited the claimants a lot more monetarily).


So why not get him for defamation instead? Sounds like you are defending this law because of it's infinite flexibility.

Quote:
As for the Victorian legislation, I have no idea what it says


http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/rarta2001265/s25.html

A person must not, on the ground of the religious belief or activity of another person or class of persons, knowingly engage in conduct with the intention of inciting serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of, that other person or class of persons.

Penalty: imprisonment for 6 months or 60 penalty units or both.


Quote:
but on this occasion, yes its true I don't think it was wrong to charge that clown over a violent and clearly intimidatory video.


He was not charged with violence or intimidation.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 36802
I like fish
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #108 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:58pm
 
Another one:

The Mechanic wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:54pm:
AND so it begins...

Quote:
Australia's first female Muslim MP wants to change 18C race laws to include religion - so it is illegal to insult followers of Islam


Australia's first female federal Muslim MP Anne Aly wants racial discrimination laws broadened so it is illegal to insult followers of Islam.
The Egyptian-born politician's call comes only days after a motion was passed in Canada calling on the federal government to 'condemn Islamophobia'.
While Australia's Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull wants to remove the words 'insult', 'offend' and 'humiliate' from section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, Labor wants to go the opposite way.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4356680/Muslim-MP-Anne-Aly-wants-Islam-insults-race-laws.html

'I find it a little bit strange that someone can call you a "dirty Arab" and that be covered under the bill, but if they called you a dirty Muslim, you're not covered [under 18C],' she told The Australian.

'There's scope there. I'd like to see that discussion happen because I think we have definitely seen an increase in anti-Islamic rhetoric.'

Ms Dover is also campaigning to stop Somali-born Islam critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali from touring Australian next month and has previously represented accused terror suspects.

Dr Aly's call to amend racial discrimination laws to include religion comes a week after Victoria's Multicultural Affairs Minister Robin Scott threatened to strengthen state laws that already curb the right to criticise religion.

'We will review Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 to consider ways to strengthen legislative protections, should the federal coalition be successful with their amendments,' he said.

Religious vilification laws potentially threaten secular values and open the door to blasphemy cases if they are legally exploited by religious groups.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 30947
Gender: male
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #109 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 9:00pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:58pm:
Another one:

The Mechanic wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:54pm:
AND so it begins...

Quote:
Australia's first female Muslim MP wants to change 18C race laws to include religion - so it is illegal to insult followers of Islam


Australia's first female federal Muslim MP Anne Aly wants racial discrimination laws broadened so it is illegal to insult followers of Islam.
The Egyptian-born politician's call comes only days after a motion was passed in Canada calling on the federal government to 'condemn Islamophobia'.
While Australia's Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull wants to remove the words 'insult', 'offend' and 'humiliate' from section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, Labor wants to go the opposite way.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4356680/Muslim-MP-Anne-Aly-wants-Islam-insults-race-laws.html

'I find it a little bit strange that someone can call you a "dirty Arab" and that be covered under the bill, but if they called you a dirty Muslim, you're not covered [under 18C],' she told The Australian.

'There's scope there. I'd like to see that discussion happen because I think we have definitely seen an increase in anti-Islamic rhetoric.'

Ms Dover is also campaigning to stop Somali-born Islam critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali from touring Australian next month and has previously represented accused terror suspects.

Dr Aly's call to amend racial discrimination laws to include religion comes a week after Victoria's Multicultural Affairs Minister Robin Scott threatened to strengthen state laws that already curb the right to criticise religion.

'We will review Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 to consider ways to strengthen legislative protections, should the federal coalition be successful with their amendments,' he said.

Religious vilification laws potentially threaten secular values and open the door to blasphemy cases if they are legally exploited by religious groups.


There is a Constitutional barrier on that one.
Back to top
 

And Indian women aren't exactly LBFMs. ~ A Member
A Member ~ kill every man woman and child, who is a Muslim.
A Member ~ I know if he had touched my kid he [taxi driver]would need an Ambulance
 
IP Logged
 
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 15753
A cat with a view
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #110 - Jul 31st, 2017 at 9:20am
 
The_Barnacle wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 12:15pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 12:11pm:
Calling for her to be sacked is not an attack on her freedom of speech.


So you think that mounting a campaign to sack someone isn't an attack on their freedom of speech?

You seem to have a highly flexible attitude to freedom of speech








Quote:

By Christine Douglass-Williams on Jul 29, 2017 12:14 pm

UK: Muslim radio station loses license after broadcasting calls to jihad violence


Sermons by radical preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, aired by Iman FM during Ramadan, “amounted to a direct call to action to members of the Muslim community to prepare for and carry out violent action against non-Muslim people.”

This series went on for some time, without complaints from viewers.

It is revealing that this station was inciting.....

Google


I'm sure that some/many moslems [even some moslems living here in Australia] would also describe this loss of a broadcasting license, for a 'Muslim radio station' in the UK,         an attack on UK moslems freedom of speech.

Would you concur Barnacle ?


Back to top
 

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 15753
A cat with a view
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #111 - Jul 31st, 2017 at 9:48am
 
gandalf wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 1:42pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 1:35pm:
I am not dismissing her rights.

If you cannot do your job, you get fired. This is not a violation of your rights, even if that job happens to involve speaking.



Writing an inoffensive tweet and expressing her beliefs about sharia had nothing to do with her ability to do her job.

She was intimidated into self-censoring, and her employer was eventually intimidated into terminating her employment.

You know, the sort of self censorship you always cry about - when its muslims causing it.




'expressing her beliefs about sharia'



Yassmin Abdel-Magied was publicly promoting an acceptance of Sharia [and ISLAM] in Australia, deceitfully.

Deceitfully, by implying that Australians have nothing to fear from Sharia [ISLAMIC law], and that there is nothing wrong with, or nothing to be feared from Sharia [ISLAMIC law].

In that public, nation-wide promotion, Yassmin Abdel-Magied, was being deceitful.

Why so ?

Because ISLAMIC law actually encourages violence against those who do not believe as moslems believe.

And ISLAMIC law actually makes lawful, violence against those who do not believe as moslems believe.



.




Yadda said.....
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1498599842/17#17
Quote:


Moslems living in Australia....
......are not Australians.



They are moslems, who are living in Australia, who are promoting ISLAMISM in Australia.

.




"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29


"Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred...."
Koran 58.22


"O ye who believe! Choose not your fathers nor your brethren for friends if they take pleasure in disbelief rather than faith. Whoso of you taketh them for friends, such are wrong-doers."
Koran 9.23



.



"Me praying five times a day is sharia."

- Yassmin Abdel-Magied

Honest !


ISLAMIC LAW TEXT....
"Ibn 'Umar related that the Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, said, "I have been ordered to kill the people until they testify that there is no god except Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer and pay the zakah. If they do that, their blood and wealth are protected from me save by the rights of Islam. Their reckoning will be with Allah." (Related by al-Bukhari and Muslim.) "
fiqhussunnah/fus1_06



ISLAMIC LAW TEXT....
"Ibn 'Abbas reported that the Prophet said: "The bare essence of Islam and the basics of the religion are three [acts], upon which Islam has been established. Whoever leaves one of them becomes an unbeliever and his blood may legally be spilled. [The acts are:] Testifying that there is no God except Allah, the obligatory prayers, and the fast of Ramadan."...."
fiqhussunnah/#3.110

n.b.
"Whoever......becomes an unbeliever.....his blood may legally be spilled."


Back to top
 

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 14823
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #112 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 8:07pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 8:40pm:
Quote:
I don't think anyone is even bothering to hold up Andrew Bolt as a martyr his defeat anymore over - probably because people finally understand that he didn't lose for causing offense per se, but for lying, and effectively defaming a group of Aborigines (he would have lost a defamation case, which would have benefited the claimants a lot more monetarily).


So why not get him for defamation instead? Sounds like you are defending this law because of it's infinite flexibility.


The Aborigines who took Bolt to court made it clear that for them this was a matter of principle, and that they wanted to expose Bolt's racial vilification - rather than his blatant defamation of them. Even though they knew they could have made a fortune out of Bolt if they went the defamation route.

More generally, 18c doesn't need changing on the basis of 'if it aint broke, don't fix it'. As I have said probably no one has had their freedom taken away by 18c, with arguably the exception of holocaust deniers. But even that point is rather moot for the simple reason that nearly everyone- and especially the very people who are advocating changing 18c - are tripping over themselves to reassure the public (or probably more accurately reassure the Israeli lobbies that back them), that holocaust denial will always remain banned whatever happens.

But aside from holocaust denial, 18c hasn't taken away anyone's freedom. Not even those ghastly freedom-hating muslims have done anything under 18c. Mostly people just sue for defamation/libel if they want to take legal action when they feel offended by what people say about them. There's also the fact that people's freedoms are largely protected by the provisions of 18d.

Quite simply, you really can't silence other people under 18c on the mere basis of feeling offended by what they say. There is enough legal precedent to prove that. But perhaps a more useful purpose of 18c is to uphold a symbol of tolerance - a message to society that it is not ok to racially insult people. And I think that is about the most powerful argument against tearing it up - that abolishing a law that doesn't actually affect people's freedoms would send the message that people have a 'right to be bigots'. I'm not sure we need that sort of message.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 36802
I like fish
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #113 - Aug 3rd, 2017 at 11:54pm
 
Quote:
More generally, 18c doesn't need changing on the basis of 'if it aint broke, don't fix it'. As I have said probably no one has had their freedom taken away by 18c, with arguably the exception of holocaust deniers. But even that point is rather moot for the simple reason that nearly everyone- and especially the very people who are advocating changing 18c - are tripping over themselves to reassure the public (or probably more accurately reassure the Israeli lobbies that back them), that holocaust denial will always remain banned whatever happens.


So don't fix it because it aint broke, except it is actually broken, but that's OK because it is a popular flaw? Are you having trouble finding a principle here Gandalf?

Can you predict what other ways we might loose our freedom as people actually test this law?

Is it just a coincidence that the only time you oppose these laws to deny people basic freedom is when Jews are the beneficiaries? But when it protects Islam and Muslims from criticism you are all for it?
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Raven
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 1610
Around
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #114 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 2:22am
 
Freedom of speech is not a right in Australia. Some of us may presume that because we live in a liberal democracy like Australia, certain personal freedoms are a given, like free speech, and that any imposition on a person’s speech would be viewed as an attempt to curtail the freedom. Additionally, we’re going to presume (for the sake of the topic of this piece) that many Australians would be familiar with the US Constitution and specifically the First Amendment which states; “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”, and we’re going to also guess (again for efficacy) that some people may believe that we here in Australia also enjoy a similar type of Constitutional protection: But do we? Well… it must be said that Australia’s free speech laws are interesting to say the least.

The Australian Constitution does not explicitly protect freedom of expression. However, the High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensible part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution.  It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals.

The High Court in has stated that the protection of freedom of communication in the Constitution is not absolute, and that “it is limited to what is necessary for the effective operation of that system of representative and responsible government provided for by the Constitution.”

Essentially Australia has 2 key elements that make up our freedom of speech: freedom of opinion and freedom of expression.

Freedom of opinion is your right to hold opinions—however different from mainstream opinion it may be—without interference. There are no exceptions or restrictions to this right.

Freedom of expression relates to any medium, including written and oral communication, the media, public protest, broadcasting, artistic works and commercial advertising. This right is not absolute, as it may be restricted in areas such as posting on the internet, the urging of violence or classification of artistic material and in relation to publishing defamatory information about someone.
Back to top
 

Quoth the Raven "Nevermore"

Raven would rather ask questions that may never be answered, then accept answers which must never be questioned.
 
IP Logged
 
Ye Grappler
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 30341
Mid-North Coast NSW
Gender: male
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #115 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 2:39am
 
Every time I see this title - I think of Spike Jones' "Dinner Music For People Who Aren't Very Hungry."


Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 36802
I like fish
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #116 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 12:29pm
 
Raven wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 2:22am:
Freedom of speech is not a right in Australia. Some of us may presume that because we live in a liberal democracy like Australia, certain personal freedoms are a given, like free speech, and that any imposition on a person’s speech would be viewed as an attempt to curtail the freedom. Additionally, we’re going to presume (for the sake of the topic of this piece) that many Australians would be familiar with the US Constitution and specifically the First Amendment which states; “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”, and we’re going to also guess (again for efficacy) that some people may believe that we here in Australia also enjoy a similar type of Constitutional protection: But do we? Well… it must be said that Australia’s free speech laws are interesting to say the least.

The Australian Constitution does not explicitly protect freedom of expression. However, the High Court has held that an implied freedom of political communication exists as an indispensible part of the system of representative and responsible government created by the Constitution.  It operates as a freedom from government restraint, rather than a right conferred directly on individuals.

The High Court in has stated that the protection of freedom of communication in the Constitution is not absolute, and that “it is limited to what is necessary for the effective operation of that system of representative and responsible government provided for by the Constitution.”

Essentially Australia has 2 key elements that make up our freedom of speech: freedom of opinion and freedom of expression.

Freedom of opinion is your right to hold opinions—however different from mainstream opinion it may be—without interference. There are no exceptions or restrictions to this right.

Freedom of expression relates to any medium, including written and oral communication, the media, public protest, broadcasting, artistic works and commercial advertising. This right is not absolute, as it may be restricted in areas such as posting on the internet, the urging of violence or classification of artistic material and in relation to publishing defamatory information about someone.


You are missing the point. Whether you are free to do something does not depend on a piece of paper saying you are. It depends on your willingness to defend that freedom. If the majority of Americans wanted to take away their own freedom, it would be inevitable. Just look at the nonsense they carry on with over the right to bear arms. They still think the constitution means something and bring it up every time the government thinks of another way to infringe that right.

Also, an Australian has been jailed for having the wrong opinion on the holocaust. The distinction between the right to have an opinion and the right to express it is meaningless.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
BigOl64
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 12308
Darwin NT
Gender: male
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #117 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 12:45pm
 
gandalf wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 8:07pm:
The Aborigines who took Bolt to court made it clear that for them this was a matter of principle, and that they wanted to expose Bolt's racial vilification - rather than his blatant defamation of them. Even though they knew they could have made a fortune out of Bolt if they went the defamation route.

More generally, 18c doesn't need changing on the basis of 'if it aint broke, don't fix it'. As I have said probably no one has had their freedom taken away by 18c, with arguably the exception of holocaust deniers. But even that point is rather moot for the simple reason that nearly everyone- and especially the very people who are advocating changing 18c - are tripping over themselves to reassure the public (or probably more accurately reassure the Israeli lobbies that back them), that holocaust denial will always remain banned whatever happens.

But aside from holocaust denial, 18c hasn't taken away anyone's freedom. Not even those ghastly freedom-hating muslims have done anything under 18c. Mostly people just sue for defamation/libel if they want to take legal action when they feel offended by what people say about them. There's also the fact that people's freedoms are largely protected by the provisions of 18d.

Quite simply, you really can't silence other people under 18c on the mere basis of feeling offended by what they say. There is enough legal precedent to prove that. But perhaps a more useful purpose of 18c is to uphold a symbol of tolerance - a message to society that it is not ok to racially insult people. And I think that is about the most powerful argument against tearing it up - that abolishing a law that doesn't actually affect people's freedoms would send the message that people have a 'right to be bigots'. I'm not sure we need that sort of message.




There has never been 'freedom of speech in this country there is no codified right to free speech, so please refrain form using such an erroneous term.


You can say what the government allows you to say, the greater your 'victim-hood' the greater that privileged is bestowed to you and 18c reinforces that.


I never cared must for such bullsh1t and if someone is offended, so be it.


Back to top
 

You have obviously mistaken me for someone who gives a rat's rectum!
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 30947
Gender: male
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #118 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 2:35pm
 
Quote:
Also, an Australian has been jailed for having the wrong opinion on the holocaust.


We've been over this a zillion times and you know that is 100% horseshit, but you keep perpetuating that blatant lie, won't you.
Back to top
 

And Indian women aren't exactly LBFMs. ~ A Member
A Member ~ kill every man woman and child, who is a Muslim.
A Member ~ I know if he had touched my kid he [taxi driver]would need an Ambulance
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 36802
I like fish
Re: Freedom of Speech for Unpopular People
Reply #119 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 9:08am
 
Quote:
There has never been 'freedom of speech in this country there is no codified right to free speech


What is codified, and what you are free to do, are not the same thing.

Aussie wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 2:35pm:
Quote:
Also, an Australian has been jailed for having the wrong opinion on the holocaust.


We've been over this a zillion times and you know that is 100% horseshit, but you keep perpetuating that blatant lie, won't you.


You were wrong every single time Aussie, and you will continue to be wrong. Perhaps you should get a lawyer to explain it to you.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 
Send Topic Print