Jacinda ArdernÔÇÖs calls for censorship is a ÔÇÿwar on freedom

[Lilith7]

" it looks like she is trying to push this "hate speech" bill though again which is an attack on free speech."

Is it bollocks.

 It is an attempt to rein in idiots pushing hate speech. Particularly the type of hate speech which disparages a particular group of people such as Maori, Jewish, African or Muslim people.
Anyone will be free to say whatever they like as long as they're not using hate speech to disparage or arouse hatred against others.

In some countries, it will in future include misogyny. And not before time.


https://www.familylaw.co.uk/news_and_com...t-s-needed

Please define "hate" speech?
I "hate" the religion, cult i grew up in.
I should be able to freely speak against it, the truth is these cults get automatic protection under the umbrella of religion, when in reality they are not.

Are you saying i have to love this cult that destroys lives, protects pedophiles and shuns their family members who choose to leave (they cant leave freely)?

Thats why free speech is important, even if some disagree to whats being said.

---

CT, tell me please, what is so good about free speech if it causes harm?

Is it not a bit like handing out free guns to all and sundry?

see my post above.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speec...by_country

"Hate speech is public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation.[1] Hate speech is "usually thought to include communications of animosity or disparagement of an individual or a group on account of a group characteristic such as race, colour, national origin, sex, disability, religion, or sexual orientation"

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/nzs-hate-spee...-explained

"Since the March 15 terror attack, when the Government pledged a review of hate speech legislation, the issue has attracted more than its fair share of hyperbole and fearmongering.

Hate speech is a complex issue at the best of times, trying to strike the fine balance between the right to freedom of expression and the rights of people to live their lives freely without facing threats on the basis of their immutable characteristics.

New Zealand has had hate speech laws on the books in one form or another for decades. The current iteration came into effect in 1993, when the Human Rights Act was passed.

It creates civil remedies and criminal offences for "inciting racial disharmony". If found guilty of the criminal offence, a person can be imprisoned for up to three months or made to pay a fine of up to $7000.

In order to have breached the law, a person has to have published, broadcast or said in public words which are "threatening, abusive, or insulting" that are "likely to excite hostility or ill-will against, or bring into contempt or ridicule" any group of people based on their skin colour, race, ethnicity or national origin while intending to do so.

Given this consistent narrowing of the application of the law, there has only been one successful prosecution for inciting racial disharmony in the 29 years the Human Rights Act has been in effect. That came last year, when Tauranga man Richard Jacobs posted a YouTube video calling for genocide and a race war against Māori."


https://dictionary.cambridge.org/diction...hate-speec

 

"public speech that expresses hate or encourages violence towards a person or group based on something such as race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation (= the fact of being gay, etc.):

Citing a law prohibiting hate speech against a minority, a district court sentenced him to a month in prison."