Hate Speech Public Consultation

DeadHand · 18-12-2020 11:15AM

Massively dangerous legislation.

Doubly so when the progressivism at any cost agenda dominates the political and media landscapes so thoroughly. It may well become a criminal offence to even question ruinous, sacred projects such as mass immigration/multiculturalism as they accelerate.

Sickening but not surprising to see progressivists (many of whom falsely consider themselves to be liberal) cheerleading this attempt to reinforce state control over the individual and curtail personal liberty.

They rightly believe that this sinister legislation will be used to silence their opponents today. Have they thought about tomorrow? Once a state gains this power over a populace, a government of any type could use it to oppress people of any type in ways unforeseen when said power was first invested.

For now, certain forces will be gleeful as we further surrender our capacity for dissent, even as society degenerates before our eyes.

And we rumble onward to a dark place.

biko · 18-12-2020 11:17AM

KiKi III wrote: »

A lot of the questions on this post would be answered by reading an article on it:

“The test for criminal hate speech will be the perpetrator’s intentions, not how the speech was perceived by the victim.

That should be "what we believe your intentions were".

You posting "Muslims are often racist" on boards.ie may not be perceived by the victim as hate (actually it probably won't get their attention at all) but we think you posted it on boards to demean Muslims reputation in the eyes of readers.
You are now on the hate-speech list.

You posting "US Republicans are often racist" on boards.ie may not be perceived by the victim as hate (actually it probably won't get their attention at all) but we think you posted it on boards to demean Republicans reputation in the eyes of readers.
You are now on the hate-speech list.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 11:18AM

DeadHand wrote: »

Massively dangerous legislation.

Doubly so when the progressivism at any cost agenda dominates the political and media landscapes so thoroughly. It may well become a criminal offence to even question ruinous, sacred projects such as mass immigration/multiculturalism as they accelerate.

Sickening but not surprising to see progressivists (many of whom falsely consider themselves to be liberal) cheerleading this attempt to reinforce state control over the individual and curtail personal liberty.

They rightly believe that this sinister legislation will be used to silence their opponents today. Have they thought about tomorrow? Once a state gains this power over a populace, a government of any type could use it to oppress people of any type in ways unforeseen when said power was first invested.

For now, certain forces will be gleeful as we further surrender our capacity for dissent, even as society degenerates before our eyes.

And we rumble onward to a dark place.

Nothing in this legislation removes anyone’s capacity to dissent.

Very little empathy for victims of persistent abuse on this thread. It’s led to suicide in more than one case and a lot of misery besides.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 11:20AM

biko wrote: »

That should be "what we believe your intentions were".

You posting "Muslims are often racist" on boards.ie may not be perceived by the victim as hate (actually it probably won't get their attention at all) but we think you posted it on boards to demean Muslims reputation in the eyes of readers.
You are now on the hate-speech list.

It’s very clear from reading about that proposed legislation that this would not qualify as hate speech.

However, if you posted 400 messages that say “Muslims are paedos” in a month and there’s a clear pattern of abusive hate-filled rhetoric, it probably would.

Kivaro · 18-12-2020 11:23AM

KiKi III wrote: »

Asked if it will be an offence to misgender a trans person or use their former name, Mr McEntee said: “We’re not trying to catch people out, this is not something you can stumble into by accident."[/url]

Based on your typo, this is something that can indeed be stumbled into by accident.
The fact that the Justice Minister is now using phrases like "We're not trying to catch people out" is part of the fear factor that they want to instill in the Irish public. They want a situation that if there is even a remote possibility on whether you could be prosecuted for saying/posting something, or even mistyping a pronoun or title, then the freedom of expressing an opinion has indeed been hampered a great deal.
One man/woman's hate speech can be one man/woman's typo (irrespective of perceived intent). Perception is in the eye of the beholder.

This is a divisive bill that will most certainly be abused by some.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 11:29AM

Kivaro wrote: »

Based on your typo, this is something that can indeed be stumbled into by accident.
The fact that the Justice Minister is now using phrases like "We're not trying to catch people out" is part of the fear factor that they want to instill in the Irish public. They want a situation that if there is even a remote possibility on whether you could be prosecuted for saying/posting something, or even mistyping a pronoun or title, then the freedom of expressing an opinion has indeed been hampered a great deal.
One man/woman's hate speech can be one man/woman's typo (irrespective of perceived intent). Perception is in the eye of the beholder.

This is a divisive bill that will most certainly be abused by some.

Well you definitely didn’t read the article. It explicitly says misgendering someone wouldn’t come into it.

Seathrun66 · 18-12-2020 11:35AM

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

There are a couple of fields beside the circle k shop on the motorway near cashel in Tipperary. In these fields there are many horses tied on short ropes who are out in all weathers. Some of the horses are skin and bone. There are also dogs tied up inside a council owned fenced off adjacent area. These dogs are in poor condition too.
Beside these fields there are caravans with piles of rubbish scattered on the grass. There is also a house in poor condition with rubbish thrown around the area. In general it is a disgrace.

Members of the travelling community live here and are responsible for littering and what looks like clear animal mistreatment.
They should be evicted from the land, fined and have the animals taken from them.

Is this a hate speech ?

No. You're not inciting violence nor are you making crude hateful generalisations about people but making a specific complaint about a specific group of people.
If all true then you can also report this under Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013. The littering laws may not be broken as it may not be on public property.

The most important point is that your comments are not hate speech and will not be interpreted as such by the law.

Wibbs · 18-12-2020 11:43AM

KiKi III wrote: »

If you’re not eligible for promotion at the moment because of your gender that’s illegal and you can take a case.

Of course, it’s always possible you’re not getting promoted because of your performance, your attitude, because you’re seen as a difficult person to work with or because you spend an enormous amount of the day on boards...

As an aside you do know you could have written that same post to a woman complaining about her lack of promotion before labour equality was laid down in law?

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 11:44AM

Wibbs wrote: »

As an aside you do know you could have written that same post to a woman complaining about her lack of promotion before labour equality was laid down in law?

Of course. And even when the law was put in place gender discrimination has always been difficult to prove, and the burden of proof is on the person making the allegation.

I wasn’t making a general statement though. I imagine GarIT in particular is a difficult person to work with based on my interactions with him.

CtevenSrowder · 18-12-2020 12:07PM

KiKi III wrote: »

A lot of the questions on this post would be answered by reading an article on it:

“The test for criminal hate speech will be the perpetrator’s intentions, not how the speech was perceived by the victim.

The Bill, which is due to be drafted over the coming months, will list trans people and people with disabilities, alongside already protected groups such as other members of the LGBT community people, refugees and immigrants, Travellers and ethnic and religious groups.

Asked if it will be an offence to misgender a trans person or use their former name, Mr McEntee said: “We’re not trying to catch people out, this is not something you can stumble into by accident. This is not about somebody causing offence to somebody else or misspeaking.

“What is very clear is we’re talking about a intention or recklessness to incite hatred against one individual or a group of people.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/hate-speech-law-not-about-catching-people-out-says-minister-1.4439740?mode=amp

Intentionally misgendering someone, or using their old name, being a crime is ridiculous. Her response seems to indicate doing such a thing could be a crime. Her response doesn't exactly allay any fears.

There are posters on this forum who believe that dead naming is the equivalent of racial abuse.

Eric Cartman · 18-12-2020 12:45PM

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Intentionally misgendering someone, or using their old name, being a crime is ridiculous. Her response seems to indicate doing such a thing could be a crime. Her response doesn't exactly allay any fears.

There are posters on this forum who believe that dead naming is the equivalent of racial abuse.

And those same people use ‘cis’ as a slur against women. Cant win with them

GarIT · 18-12-2020 12:50PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

And those same people use ‘cis’ as a slur against women. Cant win with them

And men. I've been called cis many times.

Mad_maxx · 18-12-2020 01:01PM

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

There are a couple of fields beside the circle k shop on the motorway near cashel in Tipperary. In these fields there are many horses tied on short ropes who are out in all weathers. Some of the horses are skin and bone. There are also dogs tied up inside a council owned fenced off adjacent area. These dogs are in poor condition too.
Beside these fields there are caravans with piles of rubbish scattered on the grass. There is also a house in poor condition with rubbish thrown around the area. In general it is a disgrace.

Members of the travelling community live here and are responsible for littering and what looks like clear animal mistreatment.
They should be evicted from the land, fined and have the animals taken from them.

Is this a hate speech ?

the kind of " thinkers " who are gunning for robust " hate speech " legislation to be enacted , dont believe that official minorities should be held to the same standards as the rest of us

travellers rank high on the sacred cow list so the above offenses dont apply to them im afraid

biko · 18-12-2020 01:04PM

Zebra3 wrote: »

According to the IT this morning, "holocaust denial" will be included under hate speech.

Which holocaust will that be? All of them, or just the nazi holocaust?

I guess nakba denial will be included under hate speech too? Right? :rolleyes:

And zionism? Or will we continue to allow hate speech that calls for ethnic cleansing of some native people?

Ireland still hasn't recognised the Armenian genocide so that's ok to deny I suppose..

Hunky Monster wrote: »

What exactly constitutes "denial" though. What if let's say someone disputed the numbers...is that hate speech...and who decides?

It's usually included in "denial" to say the numbers are less than the generally accepted 6 million (give or take a million).

Mad_maxx · 18-12-2020 01:07PM

jay0109 wrote: »

It's coming from the same side of the house that wants to overturn the Citizenship referendum without letting the people vote i.e. what remains of the Labour Party, a myriad of Govt and Soros/Feeney funded NGO's and other Liberal/Champagne lefties.

They have no mandate for most of the change they want in Ireland but they are well funded with access to the Govt and Civil Servants.
Ivana Bacik, rejected several times by the Irish electorate in open elections, is getting plenty of publicity on this from a compliant media. She mentioned on Drivetime yesterday there had been 400 submissions on the Hate Speech review....most of them prob from the NGO's and connected parties.

Who really runs this country anymore!

the colour of the jersey of the sitting minister who signs of on this is irrelevant , the real power is behind the throne

FG know that a relatively small number of lobbyists , NGO big hitters and media are far more important to keep on side than the general public , FF ( under MM or jim o callaghan ) would do the exact same however

biko · 18-12-2020 01:09PM

https://www.economist.com/international/2019/08/17/the-global-gag-on-free-speech-is-tightening

The global gag on free speech is tightening
In both democracies and dictatorships, it is getting harder to speak up

https://www.article19.org/resources/article-19-report-shows-sharp-decline-in-global-freedom-of-expression-since-2014/

“Our data shows that freedom of expression has been in decline for ten years and that this demise has accelerated significantly in the last three years.
“This is a global phenomenon with many violations happening in countries where freedom of expression has traditionally been protected.

If someone wants to limit your speech, but not their own, they are not your friend.

Mad_maxx · 18-12-2020 01:09PM

if this goes through , were a rural elderly farmer ( not versed in WOKE ) to tell a bunch of tinkers who were out to rob him , to fcuk off , he could well find himself up on hate speech charges

were going to need a bigger police force

Eric Cartman · 18-12-2020 01:13PM

Mad_maxx wrote: »

the kind of " thinkers " who are gunning for robust " hate speech " legislation to be enacted , dont believe that official minorities should be held to the same standards as the rest of us

travellers rank high on the sacred cow list so the above offenses dont apply to them im afraid

The word ‘racism’ has already been redrawn, those who are the ‘oppressed’ cannot be an ‘oppressor’ so basically this law only applies to white people who aren't travellers or jews.

biko · 18-12-2020 01:14PM

If this goes through then all the posts of "Trump is a racist" will lead to prosecutions.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 01:15PM

Mad_maxx wrote: »

if this goes through , were a rural elderly farmer ( not versed in WOKE ) to tell a bunch of tinkers who were out to rob him , to fcuk off , he could well find himself up on hate speech charges

were going to need a bigger police force

This is blatantly not the case.

Most of the people on the thread who oppose the legislation either haven’t read up on it and are jumping to dramatic conclusions or are deliberately misconstruing it.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 01:15PM

biko wrote: »

If this goes through then all the posts of "Trump is a racist" will lead to prosecutions.

Nope.

18-12-2020 01:16PM

KiKi III wrote: »

Most of the people on the thread who oppose the legislation either haven’t read up on it and are jumping to dramatic conclusions or are deliberately misconstruing it.

Strangely enough, we could say the same about the people defending/supporting the legislation.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 01:19PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Strangely enough, we could say the same about the people defending/supporting the legislation.

You could, but I’ve posted links to articles and quoted from them to support my view.

Most people on the other side of the argument are relying on pretty hysterical slippery slope arguments completely lacking in substance.

GarIT · 18-12-2020 01:20PM

KiKi III wrote: »

This is blatantly not the case.

Most of the people on the thread who oppose the legislation either haven’t read up on it and are jumping to dramatic conclusions or are deliberately misconstruing it.

I'd say the exact same about the opposite side and I've read it in detail once and gone back to check a few sections other times.

I think it all is caused by one side trusting it to be well intentioned so ignoring the ambiguity and the other site wanting laws to be clear so pushing the ambiguity to see to what extremes it could be applied.

Nermal · 18-12-2020 01:21PM

KiKi III wrote: »

Asked if it will be an offence to misgender a trans person or use their former name, Mr McEntee said: “We’re not trying to catch people out, this is not something you can stumble into by accident. This is not about somebody causing offence to somebody else or misspeaking.

“What is very clear is we’re talking about a intention or recklessness to incite hatred against one individual or a group of people.”

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/hate-speech-law-not-about-catching-people-out-says-minister-1.4439740?mode=amp

She could have simply said 'no', but didn't. Because the answer is 'yes'.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 01:22PM

GarIT wrote: »

I'd say the exact same about the opposite side and I've read it in detail once and gone back to check a few sections other times.

I think it all is caused by one side trusting it to be well intentioned so ignoring the ambiguity and the other site wanting laws to be clear so pushing the ambiguity to see to what extremes it could be applied.

You know it has yet to go through all the normal stages of a bill becoming law, pass Committees, the Dáil and the Seanad?

Eric Cartman · 18-12-2020 01:24PM

KiKi III wrote: »

You could, but I’ve posted links to articles and quoted from them to support my view.

Most people on the other side of the argument are relying on pretty hysterical slippery slope arguments completely lacking in substance.

Having seen the landscape of boards posts , do you think that in the average CA thread that any poster who has posted anything or if they were to say those posts out loud in public would be guilty of anything under these laws ?

Can you think of, in your interpretation , any persons in Ireland who would fall foul of these laws if they re-uttered certain sentiments?

Do you think this will in any way prevent people protesting against migration or journalists reporting on the over representation of traveller, african and ‘asian’ people in crime in the country. ?

Sir Oxman · 18-12-2020 01:28PM

KiKi III wrote: »

You know it has yet to go through all the normal stages of a bill becoming law, pass Committees, the Dáil and the Seanad?

Indeed.
Many changes, additions can be done between now and then with more input from vested interests within the current critical theory framework.

I am glad to hear she has intimated it won't be setup 'to catch out' people or pander to narcissistic and opportunistic people but forgive me if I don't shut off my critical lens just yet.

GarIT · 18-12-2020 01:30PM

KiKi III wrote: »

You know it has yet to go through all the normal stages of a bill becoming law, pass Committees, the Dáil and the Seanad?

Yes, but at this stage it's too ambiguous. If it was clearer I could be more comfortable with it.

People who believe it to be well intentioned will gloss over the various parts where it says:

Hate speech

But

Even if hate can't be proven

Even if it is said calmly and politely

Any speach targeting a characteristic [of a person or people]

And

Not having malicious intentions or saying something without realising it to be hate speech can not be used as a defence.

I have also noticed you talked about patterns of hate speach. There is nowhere this mentions patterns. One sentence is enough to be prosecuted. If it did mention patterns I'd be somewhat more comfortable with it. There's also the assumption it won't be used for something once off, or something said to a friend. But that isn't written anywhere in the report. I'd even sort of assume that myself but I'd much prefer to see it written than assume it.

The minister is also saying it depends on intention and the actual report specifies intention doesn't matter.

KiKi III · 18-12-2020 01:31PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Having seen the landscape of boards posts , do you think that in the average CA thread that any poster who has posted anything or if they were to say those posts out loud in public would be guilty of anything under these laws ?

Can you think of, in your interpretation , any persons in Ireland who would fall foul of these laws if they re-uttered certain sentiments?

Do you think this will in any way prevent people protesting against migration or journalists reporting on the over representation of traveller, african and ‘asian’ people in crime in the country. ?

Yeah, I see a ton of racism and anti-LGBT commentary on this site that might fall under this legislation. I’m fine with that, the level of bile directed towards some groups on this site is disgusting. Boards would be a better site and Ireland would be a better society without it.

It’s been made very clear by the Minister that good faith arguments will not fall under this legislation. If you can articulate your concerns about immigration without falling into hate speech that’s allowed.

Freedom of speech doesn’t guarantee you a right to any platform you want without any consequences. My right to swing my fists ends when they connect with your nose.

Hate Speech Public Consultation

Comments