The Liberalists

[BobKowalski]

...

"The ECHR recognized that freedom of religion did not exempt people from expecting criticism or denial of their religion.However, it found that the woman's comments were not objective, failed to provide historical background and had no intention of promoting public debate."

I understood the basis of the ECHR argument that the point of the ruling in support was that the woman in question was using her talk as a cover for spreading anti Muslim sentiment (much as Robinson does with his banging on about Muslim rape gangs) contrary to Austrian law. But this ruling could also be used to shut down legitimate debate or criticism or even cause authorities to hesitate in investigating matters where religion is being used to impede investigation or shield from further investigations.

On balance not a fan of this ruling.

Note your original point on the Express.

 

[Damocles]

Well, the point there is that it's for the Austrians to decide what laws apply in Austria. But the ECHR judgements have force across Europe and outside Austria. But specifically for this one, I'd reserve judgement until there was more than a Daily Express article about it.

It's all over the place, just the first link in Google News

 

[Henkeman]

It's all over the place, just the first link in Google News

Yes, but not always the way they have phrased it. The judgement effectively says that Austria's blasphemy laws are not incompatible with human rights law - not that a blasphemy law has been brought in across Europe. It's a distinction that's important to note.

Now, it's a dreadful judgement, I agree, but it isn't quite how that and other articles have portrayed it.

 

[Damocles]

Worth a watch. Details some cases of the restriction of free speech under hate speech laws that are just ridiculous.

 

[blueinsa]

Worth a watch. Details some cases of the restriction of free speech under hate speech laws that are just ridiculous.

Thanks for that mate it was a very good watch.

Whilst i have no issue with hate speech laws and support hem it does seem we are on a very slippery and one way slope right now to a world in which anything we think, do or say will be deemed by some to be offensive or criminal and i particularly agree that it is being used by some who want to go down that road.

 

[Damocles]

Thanks for that mate it was a very good watch.

Whilst i have no issue with hate speech laws and support hem it does seem we are on a very slippery and one way slope right now to a world in which anything we think, do or say will be deemed by some to be offensive or criminal and i particularly agree that it is being used by some who want to go down that road.

I can't support hate speech laws as they're inherently political.

They're laws built on top of laws. Any act of hate speech worth noting is already breaking a different law. The problem with hate speech law is that it lacks strong and clear evidential guidelines from the CPS as it is badly written. Therefore there is no consistency and it is used in ridiculous cases such as these.

That's the logistical issue. Over the years my position on free speech has hardened to where I now am at the point of believing that unless somebody is LITERALLY endangering someone, not just "stirring up hate" then we need to let them speak.

We've become a society where people believe outrage is a viable strategy for debate and influence. We have to turn this around and only hearing more speech can do this.

 

[blueinsa]

I can't support hate speech laws as they're inherently political.

They're laws built on top of laws. Any act of hate speech worth noting is already breaking a different law. The problem with hate speech law is that it lacks strong and clear evidential guidelines from the CPS as it is badly written. Therefore there is no consistency and it is used in ridiculous cases such as these.

That's the logistical issue. Over the years my position on free speech has hardened to where I now am at the point of believing that unless somebody is LITERALLY endangering someone, not just "stirring up hate" then we need to let them speak.

We've become a society where people believe outrage is a viable strategy for debate and influence. We have to turn this around and only hearing more speech can do this.

I know your stance from chats in the mod room mate so fair play to you.

Like i said a law that stops clear hate speech on the face of it is and should be a good thing but the waters have never been clear and are now being muddied on what seems like a daily basis with the outcome a society where you are scared to even talk about certain subjects for fear of the gang/group mentality coming down on you or even worse, the authorities as they decide willy nilly what can and what cant be said or expressed.

Brexit has kind of been the straw that broke the camels back for me and the subsequent fall out, especially on social media along with the way we as a country have handled the immigration question and through social media there is without a doubt a concerted effort from some to silence people and i dont like it one bit.

As you rightly say, anger and outrage is the go to default position for them now and its being driven by social media and anyone who doesn't conform be damned.

We have several threads on here showing the exact same traits.

 

[Neville Kneville]

I know your stance from chats in the mod room mate so fair play to you.

Like i said a law that stops clear hate speech on the face of it is and should be a good thing but the waters have never been clear and are now being muddied on what seems like a daily basis with the outcome a society where you are scared to even talk about certain subjects for fear of the gang/group mentality coming down on you or even worse, the authorities as they decide willy nilly what can and what cant be said or expressed.

Brexit has kind of been the straw that broke the camels back for me and the subsequent fall out, especially on social media along with the way we as a country have handled the immigration question and through social media there is without a doubt a concerted effort from some to silence people and i dont like it one bit.

As you rightly say, anger and outrage is the go to default position for them now and its being driven by social media and anyone who doesn't conform be damned.

We have several threads on here showing the exact same traits.

And we have had plenty of examples of people getting thread bans, for showing anger and outrage which goes against the officially accepted thread mentality, whilst others on the accepted side, get away with it.

 

[blueinsa]

And we have had plenty of examples of people getting thread bans, for showing anger and outrage which goes against the officially accepted thread mentality, whilst others on the accepted side, get away with it.

No doubt mate and I’ve been guilty of it but the last few months have seen a real change in the way the site is moderated and you really do have to be a twat to get binned off these days.

 

[Damocles]

And we have had plenty of examples of people getting thread bans, for showing anger and outrage which goes against the officially accepted thread mentality, whilst others on the accepted side, get away with it.

Mods enforce policy rather than make it