I’ll be writing a submission against a hate crime law in NZ. It won’t be very sophisticated, but silence is taken as permission, so even if speaking up gets us nowhere, it’s better than staying silent. I know we can’t spend all our time speaking up about everything, but we should choose at least some things to be heard about.
You might like to scroll through Andrew Doyle's substack because I know he has done some good stuff on hate crime and/or search on my substack for hate crime - I have especially done stuff on Ireland where there is a draft bill in the pipeline.
Don't forget my favourite quote 😄Lord Justice Sedley in Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 733:
'Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having. What Speakers' Corner (where the law applies as fully as anywhere else) demonstrates is the tolerance which is both extended by the law to opinion of every kind and expected by the law in the conduct of those who disagree, even strongly, with what they hear.
From the condemnation of Socrates to the persecution of modern writers and journalists, our world has seen too many examples of state control of unofficial ideas.'
At the moment, it’s just ‘hate crime’, whatever that is. I’ll have to read up a bit about what is meant by that, but if this gets into legislation, then ‘hate speech’ inevitably follows.
I agree Dusty, the wording of the EOs is perfect. Anything less clear and the TRAs would be trying to find a way around them. And have you seen the wonderful picture of Trump, surrounded by young girls, signing the EO today, which bans males from female sports? 🎉 Amazing.
A boner of contention 😂 Jo Bartosch has a brilliant turn of phrase.
Who allowed a convicted paedophile to run a surrogacy agency? They should be locked up. I’d like to see the criteria used to allow someone to buy a baby.
Porcupines are wonderful. I never get tired of seeing them chomping on vegetables and protecting their young. #BeMorePorcupine…….protecting the young that is, not chomping on vegetables.
Yes I saw the great photo and will feature that and the EO in Part 2. I can't keep up!!!
Great piece by Jo B.
The surrogacy article is completely shocking. Yes what are the criteria!!??
Today's porcupine was too busy eating to speak unlike Teddy who I have featured before who always provides a running commentary😂 I love the Xmas Tree one of Teddy where he spins around in delight when he sees the sweetcorn!!
I’ll be writing a submission against a hate crime law in NZ. It won’t be very sophisticated, but silence is taken as permission, so even if speaking up gets us nowhere, it’s better than staying silent. I know we can’t spend all our time speaking up about everything, but we should choose at least some things to be heard about.
Well done, Katrina and please post a copy.
You might like to scroll through Andrew Doyle's substack because I know he has done some good stuff on hate crime and/or search on my substack for hate crime - I have especially done stuff on Ireland where there is a draft bill in the pipeline.
Andrew did a speech at the Battle of Ideas festival were he referred to the Brandenburg Test in the States: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
Dusty
Thanks, Dusty - I'll check out those sources.
Don't forget my favourite quote 😄Lord Justice Sedley in Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 733:
'Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having. What Speakers' Corner (where the law applies as fully as anywhere else) demonstrates is the tolerance which is both extended by the law to opinion of every kind and expected by the law in the conduct of those who disagree, even strongly, with what they hear.
From the condemnation of Socrates to the persecution of modern writers and journalists, our world has seen too many examples of state control of unofficial ideas.'
At the moment, it’s just ‘hate crime’, whatever that is. I’ll have to read up a bit about what is meant by that, but if this gets into legislation, then ‘hate speech’ inevitably follows.
Hi Katrina
Personally I don't think you can disentangle hate crime, hate speech and free speech. To say nothing of non-crime hate incidents - the UK speciality!!
Dusty
Cheers Dusty , and Liz , see now I want a wee porcupine , can thinks of loads that I want to stick a long sharp stick in !
Maybe we could bring them to Let Women Speak events😂
😂 don’t think your pugs would be impressed.
They’d be first to get a jab , stop their snoring 😂
I agree Dusty, the wording of the EOs is perfect. Anything less clear and the TRAs would be trying to find a way around them. And have you seen the wonderful picture of Trump, surrounded by young girls, signing the EO today, which bans males from female sports? 🎉 Amazing.
A boner of contention 😂 Jo Bartosch has a brilliant turn of phrase.
Who allowed a convicted paedophile to run a surrogacy agency? They should be locked up. I’d like to see the criteria used to allow someone to buy a baby.
Porcupines are wonderful. I never get tired of seeing them chomping on vegetables and protecting their young. #BeMorePorcupine…….protecting the young that is, not chomping on vegetables.
Hi TT
Glad you agree re the wording of the EOs.
Yes I saw the great photo and will feature that and the EO in Part 2. I can't keep up!!!
Great piece by Jo B.
The surrogacy article is completely shocking. Yes what are the criteria!!??
Today's porcupine was too busy eating to speak unlike Teddy who I have featured before who always provides a running commentary😂 I love the Xmas Tree one of Teddy where he spins around in delight when he sees the sweetcorn!!
Dusty
Teddy is a real character.