[AUSTRALIA] Strengthing laws on racism could hurt freedom of speech - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Rusty100;40203886]freedom of speach is overrated[/QUOTE] bahahahah yeah man i mean being allowed to openly say what you want without reprisal from the government is super lame

Americans are always so scared of the big ol government and their restricting abilities and oh dear what if they were allowed to decide when racism goes too far and needs to be stopped, now our government has the ability to restrict my freedum of speeech ever more. Well guess what, most European nations have laws in place against racism and hate speech, and we're doing fine. Jesus fuck, you guys are all so paranoid, where do you even get the strength to get up in the morning. I'd just kill myself if I was as paranoid of my government as you guys all seem to be.

[QUOTE=EvacX;40203976]Is freedom of speech overrated? It's directly tied to my personal freedom. If some high-up people start dictating what I can and cannot say then that's not the kind of society I want to live in. If I wanted to start a bloody white-supremacist group and spour hate everywhere I should have to right to do so as long as I'm not interfering with public order. Freedom of speech promotes individuality, the idea that we can choose what we want and what we don't want to believe in. The idea that I, as an individual, can work to improve myself working by towards my own ideals and nobody should be able to stop me because they disagree with what I am saying. Limits like these in question is a violation of personal freedom.[/QUOTE] That's how you feel but this is pretty much where Australia is. We have a few more protections than none at all, but we're pretty close. It's just because we vote in reasonable people (to some extent) that we don't have total restrictions everywhere. It wouldn't be hard to start a dictatorship here if you got popular support, I just don't think you'd ever get it.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;40203981]Americans are always so scared of the big ol government and their restricting abilities and oh dear what if they were allowed to decide when racism goes too far and needs to be stopped, now our government has the ability to restrict my freedum of speeech ever more. Well guess what, most European nations have laws in place against racism and hate speech, and we're doing fine. Jesus fuck, you guys are all so paranoid, where do you even get the strength to get up in the morning. I'd just kill myself if I was as paranoid of my government as you guys all seem to be.[/QUOTE] yeah i mean dont even try sympathising with the other side just go "LOL AMERICANS" and say a bunch of really ridiculous shit

You're assuming we're all americans.

[QUOTE=EvacX;40203990]You're assuming we're all americans.[/QUOTE] I'm assuming most are American since there aren't many other nations with such government paranoia and love of completely unrestricted freedom of speech.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;40203999]I'm assuming most are American since there aren't many other nations with such government paranoia and love of completely unrestricted freedom of speech.[/QUOTE] or maybe you cant sum up the ideas of random people based on dumb stereotypes most ideas in america pertaining freedom of speech and government "paranoia" stem from french and english sources

[QUOTE=thisispain;40203988]yeah i mean dont even try sympathising with the other side just go "LOL AMERICANS" and say a bunch of really ridiculous shit[/QUOTE] I can't sympathize with people who don't trust the government they chose, and allow groups like the westboro baptist church to exist because they're afraid making hate speech illegal will lead to government oppression.

i mean as far as i know john stuart mill and bertrand russell were both british

[QUOTE=EvacX;40203990]You're assuming we're all americans.[/QUOTE] It's just that the US seems to be the only place that doesn't already have these laws.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;40204013]I can't sympathize with people who don't trust the government they chose, and allow groups like the westboro baptist church to exist because they're afraid making hate speech illegal will lead to government oppression.[/QUOTE] the reason why americans allow the westboro baptist church to exist is the same reason why the dutch government allows the SGP to exist

[QUOTE=thisispain;40204014]i mean as far as i know john stuart mill and bertrand russell were both british[/QUOTE] What are you on about? I'm talking about Americans always feeling the need to respond to threads like these by telling us how bad we have it because we don't allow the things the westboro baptist church does. It's just ridiculous. If you like it that way, fine, but don't try and bring your funeral pickers my way.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;40204037]What are you on about? I'm talking about Americans always feeling the need to respond to threads like these by telling us how bad we have it because we don't allow the things the westboro baptist church does. It's just ridiculous. If you like it that way, fine, but don't try and bring your funeral pickers my way.[/QUOTE] im saying that a love of unrestricted freedom of speech is [b]completely european[/b] and you look very uneducated when you dismiss it as an american thing

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;40204013]I can't sympathize with people who don't trust the government they chose, and allow groups like the westboro baptist church to exist because they're afraid making hate speech illegal will lead to government oppression.[/QUOTE] Things like Westboro baptist church have every right to exist, and I think that everyone else also has the right to call them a massive shit hole if they so please. I can't speak for others when I say this, but I sure as hell am not afraid of my government turning into North Korea if we start banning a few words. That's not why I hate limiting freedom of speech, the reason I hate that idea of being told what I can and cannot say is because I believe it's a neccesary human right. Without bad there is no good, it creates contrast in society. It promotes individuality in the way that people have to think for them self, rather than have others think for them. If you take offence at idiots like the westboro baptist church it's your own fault. Taking offence can only be nullified by the refusal to take it. If you don't allow something to hurt you, it can't (verbally). And that's maturity.

[QUOTE=thisispain;40204032]the reason why americans allow the westboro baptist church to exist is the same reason why the dutch government allows the SGP to exist[/QUOTE] The SGP is a political party and does not picket funerals. [editline]8th April 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=EvacX;40204050]Things like Westboro baptist church have every right to exist, and I think that everyone else also has the right to call them a massive shit hole if they so please. I can't speak for others when I say this, but I sure as hell am not afraid of my government turning into North Korea if we start banning a few words. That's not why I hate limiting freedom of speech, the reason I hate that idea of being told what I can and cannot say is because I believe it's a neccesary human right. Without bad there is no good, it creates contrast in society. It promotes individuality in the way that people have to think for them self, rather than have others think for them. If you take offence at idiots like the westboro baptist church it's your own fault. Taking offence can only be nullified by the refusal to take it. If you don't allow something to hurt you, it can't (verbally). And that's maturity.[/QUOTE] No, that's being completely ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Rusty100;40203874]'implied'. aka its not actually there[/QUOTE] it's not an actual law or rule yes but the court has said that there is a level of freedom of speech,therefore it's law, sort of i don't pay attention to legal studies

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;40204053]The SGP is a political party and does not picket funerals. [/QUOTE] so is the line picketing funerals for you? religious fundies are religious fundies all over the globe but once you start censoring fundies you turn them into martyrs and give legitimacy to their crazy beliefs; WBC or SGP suppression and censorship only strengthened the religious fundamentalism in the middle east why wouldnt the same apply to the west

Hold on. Most of Australia's laws involving speech and what is and isn't acceptable are decided by whether or not a "reasonable" person would find them offensive. There is no legal definition of reasonable person, it is up to interpretation. Technically all you need to do is make a reasonable person defined as "Pastor Fred Phelps" and Australia is in deep stuff. You don't actually have to change any laws, just the judges and people. Isn't that a testament to restricting certain vocal actions not restricting freedom of speech?

People loved to say I was dumb for not being American when I said Americans are dumb about their guns but seriously it applies here more. Australia is a country where if you have the misfortune of not being white you will be told to fuck off back to where you came from because Australia, one of the least population dense countries in the world is full, even if your race happened to be there for thousands of years before the white fellas. We have had a problem with anyone not white since the first fucking fleet and the original name of our country, Terranullius (no mans land). This is a country where it's perfectly acceptable for 90% of the population to support the indefinite detention of foreigners for no other reason than they are a refugee. 2 out of 150 MPs voted against it. A major issue of the election coming up is the 457 visa and how hard we can take advantage of anyone who didn't get to be born into the motherland. A bunch of white dudes beat up some people including lifeguards and someone else said they looked kind of Middle Eastern so 5000 people took it upon themselves to hunt down and bash "evry fucken lebo cunt". This country is fucked racist and anything that reduces that is a good thing

i just know judge's rulings are a type of law, if a judge says that freedom of speech is implied within the constitution then freedom of speech does exist so any cases that are harming that law, the case would be brought up as a defence and could quickly settle it im not the best at law but im pretty sure that's how it works?

[QUOTE=thisispain;40204044]im saying that a love of unrestricted freedom of speech is [b]completely european[/b] and you look very uneducated when you dismiss it as an american thing[/QUOTE] That's simply not true as most European nations don't have completely unrestricted freedom of speech. This means that as a people we don't want that. Americans do and very much defend it so that means Americans as a people do want it.

[QUOTE=gerbe1;40204069]Hold on. Most of Australia's laws involving speech and what is and isn't acceptable are decided by whether or not a "reasonable" person would find them offensive. There is no legal definition of reasonable person, it is up to interpretation. Technically all you need to do is make a reasonable person defined as "Pastor Fred Phelps" and Australia is in deep stuff. You don't actually have to change any laws, just the judges and people. Isn't that a testament to restricting certain vocal actions not restricting freedom of speech?[/QUOTE] If Pastor Fred Phelps came down to Australia to whinge about how homosexuals are destroying the earth and the military are full of fag enablers, they'd be arrested for what I believe is breaching the peace in society, potentially they could cause a major uproar and they would be injured because I know for sure that if you talk shit you get hit

giving up the right to free speech is preferable to anarchy. if you think your speech is important enough to go back to a time/system where you could be murdered in your sleep because you lack a government to protect you, then go ahead and overthrow the government i guess. Otherwise, chill out and realize the government isn't out to get you. the rest of us will just not be racists.

[QUOTE=McGii;40204070] This is a country where it's perfectly acceptable for 90% of the population to support the indefinite detention of foreigners for no other reason than they are a refugee. 2 out of 150 MPs voted against it. A major issue of the election coming up is the 457 visa and how hard we can take advantage of anyone who didn't get to be born into the motherland. A bunch of white dudes beat up some people including lifeguards and someone else said they looked kind of Middle Eastern so 5000 people took it upon themselves to hunt down and bash "evry fucken lebo cunt". This country is fucked racist and anything that reduces that is a good thing[/QUOTE] but none of those are really freedom of speech. if the government itself is against foreign people then no law will really change anything; itll just empower the government itself, possibly even against left-wing activists

[QUOTE=thisispain;40204066]so is the line picketing funerals for you? religious fundies are religious fundies all over the globe but once you start censoring fundies you turn them into martyrs and give legitimacy to their crazy beliefs; WBC or SGP suppression and censorship only strengthened the religious fundamentalism in the middle east why wouldnt the same apply to the west[/QUOTE] The WBC hurts others, the SGP does not. The SGP is also a political party and as such are granted a more or less unrestricted freedom of speech to be able to do their job.

[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;40204084]giving up the right to free speech is preferable to anarchy. if you think your speech is important enough to go back to a time/system where you could be murdered in your sleep because you lack a government to protect you, then go ahead and overthrow the government i guess. Otherwise, chill out and realize the government isn't out to get you. the rest of us will just not be racists.[/QUOTE] But limiting free speech doesn't even make people less racist. Racism is an idea, and you can't just ban an idea, now matter how stupid it is.

[QUOTE=Riller;40204098]But limiting free speech doesn't even make people less racist. Racism is an idea, and you can't just ban an idea, now matter how stupid it is.[/QUOTE] Limiting free speech ensures racism isn't easily spread. It does make people less racist.

[QUOTE=mobrockers2;40204075]That's simply not true as most European nations don't have completely unrestricted freedom of speech. This means that as a people we don't want that. Americans do and very much defend it so that means Americans as a people do want it.[/QUOTE] well you dont get to decide what you as a people want meanwhile our beautifully written and unfortunately always ignored EU constitution says: Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. this is far more explicit than: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech we europeans have an awesome history that i am proud of fighting for freedom of speech, from the enlightment to the soixante-huitard, which is why its dumb when europeans dont understand the history and want to ignore it.

I would say Australia has unrestricted freedom of speech. Even with these laws. I can still be charged with a criminal offense if I offend someone over the phone. That's all I need to do. If a reasonable person is offended the perpetrator can be sent to jail. Most Australians wouldn't know that is a law. They would then go to the internet and say we have total freedom of speech. In fact many of them would say we have an explicit right to it. We don't. I think there may be similar misconceptions in other countries. Again, the people in charge of most of these countries don't abuse this, they are reasonable people. Always make a fuss when someone tries to restrict freedom of speech, if you think it is legitimate. Be careful that you don't waste your best rhetoric on trivial issues. When we need people to speak out against batshit insane freedom of speech restrictions you need to be able to convince us it isn't one of your silly issues again. Cynicism is freedom of speech's worst enemy I suppose. Mobrockers2 is evidence of that. [editline]april[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;40204109]meanwhile our beautifully written and unfortunately always ignored EU constitution says[/QUOTE] Uh, is that because [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe#Ratification"]it was never ratified[/URL]? This was just super quick research. I might have the wrong thing.

[QUOTE=EvacX;40204050]Things like Westboro baptist church have every right to exist, and I think that everyone else also has the right to call them a massive shit hole if they so please. I can't speak for others when I say this, but I sure as hell am not afraid of my government turning into North Korea if we start banning a few words. That's not why I hate limiting freedom of speech, the reason I hate that idea of being told what I can and cannot say is because I believe it's a neccesary human right. Without bad there is no good, it creates contrast in society. It promotes individuality in the way that people have to think for them self, rather than have others think for them. If you take offence at idiots like the westboro baptist church it's your own fault. Taking offence can only be nullified by the refusal to take it. If you don't allow something to hurt you, it can't (verbally). And that's maturity.[/QUOTE] Racism doesn't create contrast in society. Contrast would be someone proposing an idea and somebody else thinking, saying it's a bad idea because of reasons. Racism isn't valid or justified neither as an idea or as a reason in any way.