|
Post by goz on Jun 7, 2018 21:47:00 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2018 23:50:50 GMT
When you are a member of the Westboro Baptist Church and protest funerals.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 7, 2018 23:58:29 GMT
When you are a member of the Westboro Baptist Church and protest funerals.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2018 0:09:26 GMT
How about when one spews hateful things in the name of religion?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 8, 2018 0:37:48 GMT
How about when one spews hateful things in the name of religion? Well, yes, except that works both ways, to be fair. I do think that religious bigotry counts though when unrealistic and unfair against the recipients is seen as excusable on faux hateful religion grounds, no matter how much the hater believes their shit. Fortunately in most enlightened countries there are laws against it.
|
|
|
Post by thefleetsin on Jun 8, 2018 0:41:57 GMT
when the followers of gods insert their dogmas into civil systems of governments.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jun 8, 2018 0:45:21 GMT
When it becomes hate speech I imagine.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 8, 2018 0:59:03 GMT
When it becomes hate speech I imagine. Good call. The NSW government, however has widened this definition to one of 'geography'. WHERE one can display hate speech. Actually having said that, some of the placards used are NOT hate speech, they are allegedly 'informational' as viewed by the antiabortion protesters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 11, 2018 0:34:55 GMT
According to some people on the left if you criticize them or disagree than its hate speech..
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jun 11, 2018 3:49:20 GMT
When is a door not a door? When it's ajar (a jar)
|
|
|
Post by progressiveelement on Jun 11, 2018 9:38:52 GMT
When they're ranting at your door, inviting a beating upon themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Jun 11, 2018 11:50:44 GMT
When you don't effing well shut up.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 11, 2018 11:53:54 GMT
In my view, it's never criminal harassment. There should be no such thing as criminal harassment. I'm not in favor of there being any speech laws.
When is it harassment to an individual? I suppose when they don't like what someone is saying, and especially when the person saying it has any persistence.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 11, 2018 21:20:25 GMT
In my view, it's never criminal harassment. There should be no such thing as criminal harassment. I'm not in favor of there being any speech laws. When is it harassment to an individual? I suppose when they don't like what someone is saying, and especially when the person saying it has any persistence. So you disagree with this new law in NSW?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 11, 2018 21:33:00 GMT
In my view, it's never criminal harassment. There should be no such thing as criminal harassment. I'm not in favor of there being any speech laws. When is it harassment to an individual? I suppose when they don't like what someone is saying, and especially when the person saying it has any persistence. So you disagree with this new law in NSW? Yes, I disagree with all laws prohibing speech. At that, I'm not against requiring large-scale protests to not disrupt infrastrastructures--blocking roads, etc., but that's not a speech law per se. It simply requires that protests be staged so that urban areas can still flow smoothly while the protest is occurring.--basically say whatever you want to say, just don't physically control/prevent other folks from being able to move and do as they want to.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 11, 2018 23:44:06 GMT
So you disagree with this new law in NSW? Yes, I disagree with all laws prohibing speech. At that, I'm not against requiring large-scale protests to not disrupt infrastrastructures--blocking roads, etc., but that's not a speech law per se. It simply requires that protests be staged so that urban areas can still flow smoothly while the protest is occurring.--basically say whatever you want to say, just don't physically control/prevent other folks from being able to move and do as they want to. Well, then, you would have to agree that the law is not prohibiting the protestors from protesting, just moving them geographically away from the abortion clinics so that they don't hinder other people in their choice of access to abortion facilities.
|
|
|
Post by Rodney Farber on Jun 12, 2018 1:03:08 GMT
In my view, it's never criminal harassment. ... I'm not in favor of there being any speech laws. ... So, you would have no problem with someone yelling, " FIRE", in a crowded theater?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 12, 2018 1:07:21 GMT
Yes, I disagree with all laws prohibing speech. At that, I'm not against requiring large-scale protests to not disrupt infrastrastructures--blocking roads, etc., but that's not a speech law per se. It simply requires that protests be staged so that urban areas can still flow smoothly while the protest is occurring.--basically say whatever you want to say, just don't physically control/prevent other folks from being able to move and do as they want to. Well, then, you would have to agree that the law is not prohibiting the protestors from protesting, just moving them geographically away from the abortion clinics so that they don't hinder other people in their choice of access to abortion facilities. In that case how would the law have anything to do with (free) speech and harassment? Or was that just a sensationalistic thread title?
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Jun 12, 2018 1:08:17 GMT
In my view, it's never criminal harassment. ... I'm not in favor of there being any speech laws. ... So, you would have no problem with someone yelling, " FIRE", in a crowded theater? Correct. As well as no problem with slander, libel, incitement, fighting words, hate speech, etc.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jun 12, 2018 1:22:28 GMT
Well, then, you would have to agree that the law is not prohibiting the protestors from protesting, just moving them geographically away from the abortion clinics so that they don't hinder other people in their choice of access to abortion facilities. In that case how would the law have anything to do with (free) speech and harassment? Or was that just a sensationalistic thread title? ...because previously, protesters exercising their freedom of speech, had been preventing free access to the abortion clinic. WHILST they had been exercising their right of freedom of speech, they had 'harrassed' by their blocking of free access of others to a legal activity.
|
|