George Brandis: 'People have the right to be bigots' - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;44368611]I'd say no, but I don't know how what I say could be a threat to someone. Words don't kill people[/QUOTE] well say for instance, if you gave out a known pedophiles address in the middle of the street and a vigilante used that information to go torture or kill him

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;44368631]I really doubt it. People don't kill themselves because of any one thing, it takes a lot more than bullying to drive a person to suicide[/QUOTE] Yeah actually, people commit suicide over bullying. Honestly, are you being serious? This happens very often infact.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;44368631]I really doubt it. People don't kill themselves because of any one thing, it takes a lot more than bullying to drive a person to suicide[/QUOTE] what is depression

[QUOTE=isnipeu;44368656]what is depression[/QUOTE] one of those things i guess he'd classify as 'a lot more than bullying' ? you don't develop depression from bullying. not agreeing with laserbeams though, just saying

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;44368631]Bullying also isn't just about words[/QUOTE] Who said it was? Often there is an underlying issue with the victim if they commit suicide, but if they kill themselves over what was said to them, you blame the words said to them for causing it. They don't just wake up and decide to commit suicide. The words trigger it. Thinking people don't ever commit suicide over words is just ignorant.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;44368671]one of those things i guess he'd classify as 'a lot more than bullying' ? you don't develop depression from bullying. not agreeing with laserbeams though, just saying[/QUOTE] If it happens frequently from enough people then I don't see how it can't cause it.

cause depression is like, a mental illness. but actually i guess i'm not knowledgeable enough about it to say it can't be triggered by that kinda shit

[QUOTE=FlandersNed;44367659]I hope people realise that these laws aren't about people being bigots because of what they say. These laws were put into place so that people can't be a bigot with the full intent of insulting, offending, humiliating and intimidating the recipient. This law doesn't cover people who say things because they truly believe it. [url]http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rda1975202/s18c.html[/url] They also want to remove this law because [URL="http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCA/2011/1103.html?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=andrew%20bolt"]their friend Andrew Bolt got into trouble because of it.[/URL][/QUOTE] Wait, they want to remove the law? I thought they just wanted to change some part of it.

[QUOTE=Lachz0r;44368749]cause depression is like, a mental illness. but actually i guess i'm not knowledgeable enough about it to say it can't be triggered by that kinda shit[/QUOTE] I'm not a doctor or anything but I don't see why you can't develop depression from bullying. It can be a very harsh thing to deal with and could easily take a toll on a person's mental health if they are young and impressionable.

[QUOTE=Laserbeams;44368611]I'd say no, but I don't know how what I say could be a threat to someone. Words don't kill people[/QUOTE] calling out fire in a movie theater, as said before. calling in false reports of illegal activity, especially with swatting. false accusations of rape. death threats, especially over longer periods of time. there are plenty of ways absolute freedom of speech would be completely terrible

Brandis has obviously never associated with any other culture. He needs to withdraw it or resign. With confidence completely shattered in both houses of federal parliament, I believe that we could be heading to a government dissolution. With Bishop literally making new records in ejecting Opposition members within 6 months after the 2013 election, it's obvious the Liberals are pushing as many bills through the house and the senate before July 1st because they know they won't have control of it because of the appointment of new senators which are from newly created political parties,which may vote against them and defeat every government decision thus returning to another hung parliament of deadlock, which can be a massive game changer for the government.

shutter_eye5... you're dreaming... The new GG, who was just appointed by Abbott, will not be doing a DD anytime soon. There is no reason to. You'd be surprised at how many people are not disenfranchised with the Libs in power. There are plenty of people that like what the Liberals are doing.

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;44367104]I actually agree with the man, that law is horseshit. People have every right to say asinine, bigoted things. And the rest of us have every right to shun and exclude them for doing so.[/QUOTE]Its 2014, you'd think we (as a species) would have moved beyond this petty bullshit. Oh sure, they're perfectly allowed to preach these bigoted views. Just like I'm allowed to tell them to fuck off when I see them.

If you have a right to be a bigot then I have a right to break your nose for being one.

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;44369587]If you have a right to be a bigot then I have a right to break your nose for being one.[/QUOTE] You really don't though. If you get sufficiently upset by mean things people say people that you cannot control yourself, then you should probably go to an anger management class or something.

[QUOTE=Explosions;44369659]You really don't though. If you get sufficiently upset by mean things people say people that you cannot control yourself, then you should probably go to an anger management class or something.[/QUOTE] Good thing we have hate speech laws up here then, which means I don't have to worry about that.

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;44369587]If you have a right to be a bigot then I have a right to break your nose for being one.[/QUOTE] If you have a right to break their nose for being an idiot then that doesn't really leave you very safe.

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;44369693]Good thing we have hate speech laws up here then, which means I don't have to worry about that.[/QUOTE] I don't know anything about Canadian law but I would highly doubt that you have the right to punch people in the face over anything.

[QUOTE=Explosions;44369728]I don't know anything about Canadian law but I would highly doubt that you have the right to punch people in the face over anything.[/QUOTE] You don't, but you don't have the right to be a bigot. That's why the WBC was denied entry into Canada a few years back.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;44366968]But if they're using that same piece of art to harass people (blasting anti-Christian black metal into a church window from the bushes outside, leaving an anti-gay "documentary" on the doorsteps of gay couples, etc), then the situation is different. I'm not talking jail time or anything, but I think fines would be in order for repeat offenses.[/QUOTE] You do realise that's harassment and illegal pretty much everywhere already

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;44369587]If you have a right to be a bigot then I have a right to break your nose for being one.[/QUOTE] no you don't because that's assault seek help

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;44369836]You don't, but you don't have the right to be a bigot. That's why the WBC was denied entry into Canada a few years back.[/QUOTE] please take WBC we don't want them at all

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];44367448']But it's true. This is how the bourgeois notion of free speech works. You're free to speak on anything you want until you begin to apply it. You can say all that you want about abolishing the state or lynching the niggers so long as you never act on it. Which is convenient for liberals, because of course you lot already have your system and your state, you all fit nice and cozy in your civil society. So you'll say these things like "you have aright to be a bigot, you have a right to be a communist, you have a right to be a nazi", but no you don't, because your right to profess these things is undermined by the fact that you do not have a right to act them out if it affects what is the most important thing to affect, which is the political society. The point of saying this is to point out the hypocrisy of the bourgeois notion of speech- the only speech that matters is the speech of the politicos, and the speech of the politicos is the speech of the empowered class, the moneyed class. Of course this applies to any state, any ideology, but at least we don't speak our hypocrisy on the matter. The moment a radical group makes waves in politics then the western world goes MCarthy and red scare. At least I'll be open enough to say that that wouldn't happen in my endorsed prole state.[/QUOTE] Seed Eater - once again, he brings the class struggle into a debate where their is absolutely no relevance. Zero. You're an embarrassment to the left-wing.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;44370418]Seed Eater - once again, he brings the class struggle into a debate where their is absolutely no relevance. Zero. You're an embarrassment to the left-wing.[/QUOTE] The old left has been dying a slow painful death. Why just today I looked out of the bus window and saw a most depressing sight indeed. It was an old man shouting slogans next to a tattered "Scottish Socialist Party" sign in the middle of a square. People were largely ignoring him and the pile of newspapers he was trying to flog.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;44366922]Would this cover music?[/QUOTE] In Germany it does. There's a ton of Neo-Nazi songs that are inciting violence against various minorities and therefore outlawed (from being distributed or something. No one would sue you if you just listened to them quietly privately).

[QUOTE=Antdawg;44370418]Seed Eater - once again, he brings the class struggle into a debate where their is absolutely no relevance. Zero. You're an embarrassment to the left-wing.[/QUOTE] Still better than drive-by posting to make some asinine swipe at a leftist analysis of speech. Which is funny since you're doing the exact thing he talks about, he has a right to be a leftist but he can't actually act on that speech without people clamouring to tell him its irrelevant, when it isn't.

[QUOTE=J!NX;44366932]'People have the right to be bigots' and I have the right to tell them to fuck off and that they're ignorant[/QUOTE] Exactly, freedom of speech does not mean freedom of responsibilities from said speech

[QUOTE=J!NX;44366932]'People have the right to be bigots' and I have the right to tell them to fuck off and that they're ignorant[/QUOTE] This thread should have ended with this post

[QUOTE=InsanePyro;44379305]This thread should have ended with this post[/QUOTE] Imagine if people have different views on what freedom of speech should entail? Oh wait they do. It's called a discussion, and not everyone agrees with that sentiment.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;44366903][b]I doubt anyone would agree that the age-old example of "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" should be protected speech[/b], yet without being allowed to say just that you don't actually have absolute freedom of speech.[/QUOTE] I believe it should be. Yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre is a dick thing to do, but the act itself shouldn't be illegal. There's plenty of other things you can slap someone for with that, things like disturbing the peace, putting others at risk (getting trampled in a fear-induced rush toward exits is a very real risk), and I'm sure there's plenty of other things that'd be applicable as well. I'm not saying that people shouldn't get in trouble as a result of yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre; I'm simply saying that the actual act of yelling "fire" shouldn't be considered a crime. It's a bit of an argument of semantics, but it's one of those "principle of the matter" things. But then, I know people tend to disagree with my extremely liberal view of free speech. I won't press it any farther. I just wanted to address this since you more or less asked for someone to with the bolded statement.