I'm very keen on seeing you Nostramus-like predictions about 2014 policy in Catalonia.
The hell is wrong with you, Catalonia?!
- Thread starter Yeekim
- Start date
I'm very keen on seeing you Nostramus-like predictions about 2014 policy in Catalonia.
Although I'm gay I'm against making homophobic statements illegal in the interest of free speech unless the statements are clearly and intentionally provoking people to violence. It's not clear to me what this law means. I'm also against greater penalties for hate crimes although I understand why they exist and if they exist to protect racial and religious minorities then it makes sense to extend it to gay people.
Nope, in the great majority of cases they were accused of some crime. Frequently imaginary crimes. Or falsely blamed for real crimes. Hence the importance of the concepts of "innocent until proven guilty", and "right to a fair trial".
But yeah, nice to see the modern left dropping presumption of innocence from their core beliefs. I wonder what they'll drop next. Universal suffrage? Freedom of assembly? (they already dropped freedom of expression, naturally).
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Next step is when having great-grandparents who lynched blacks will be penalized.
And every white will have to prove being innocent of having great-grandparents who lynched blacks.
Straw men are alive and well in your neck of the woods, I see. That's nice.
I don't see the strawman. Useless plainly stated what amounts to a rejection of the presumption of innocence.
Useless is no more the personification of "the modern left" than I am. Equating one outspoken person's views with an entire political spectrum is foolish at best and involves great quantities of straw otherwise.
classical_hero
In whom I trust
Don't forget there were plenty of whites lynched for supporting the rights of blacks.
True. But apparently his position is widespread enough to actually be the law in some places.
I was being provocative, of course. But it's nevertheless a trend in several modern leftist tendencies to adopt a rather "lynching approach" to people suspect of some crimes / misdemeanors such as homophobia or sexual harassment.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
classical_hero, you are such a classic example of the drive-by poster. You come into a thread, respond to random posts, and then ignore most responses you get.
What's the point? 98% of the time I can already guess what you're going to say anyway.
What's the point? 98% of the time I can already guess what you're going to say anyway.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
There are many benefits of being a drive-by poster. For example, you can participate in many threads at a time.
Warpus - 9 posts left to celebrating.
Warpus - 9 posts left to celebrating.
The market-liberal government here has been applying the "guilty before innocent" principle to security legislations.
This ain't some leftist preserve.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Partnership =/= marriage.
gay_Aleks
from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!
Well, that might change if a certain country decides to overthrow the current government and slaughter all the reformists.
Also, the Stephen Fry article was.. weird. From one side, I can see it's message. From another, what the hell, dude? That's not.. what one would expect from Stephen Fry. It's more or less propaganda.
Seems like Estonia is very different from the other Baltic countries in this way.
That's equally wrong, of course. But sectors of the right have been in favor (and taken heat over) measures that presume guilt since forever. "Stop and frisk", profiling, etc etc. It was usually the left who on those cases correctly championed that people be treated as innocents until their guilt is proven. But now we see sectors of the left coming full circle and demanding that people suspected of certain offenses be treated as guilty until proven innocent.
It's the same that already happened with free speech. Originally a rallying cry of the left, now the greatest threat to it comes precisely from the left (which is not to say that all right-wingers support free speech nor that all leftists want to restrict it. Please. I'm talking about the greatest threat in Western countries).
Expand please.
Keep in mind that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom to say whatever without being called out for it. We're talking about states limiting free speech where it is not being used to slander/incite violence.
For bonus points, try to top the crackdown on freedom of speech by the current conservative government of Australia (to be fair the legislations in question passed with the support of the center-left Labor and opposed by both left-wing Greens and right-wing Libertarians)
Simple. In Brazil for instance, thanks to the current left-wing government, some posters on that thread about race and intelligence would be sent to jail. Not "called out for it", jailed. It's illegal to state that a race is more intelligent than another (note that as I made clear on the other thread I think this is false, but to make it a criminal offense is ludicrous).
So we're not talking about inciting violence or slander. We're talking about making opinions illegal. And not only that, the distribution of racist literature is also a criminal offense which also results in jail.
Now they want to do the same with homophobia. There is a bill in Congress that would make the expression of homophobic opinions a criminal offense. Inciting violence ("kill all gays!", etc) is already illegal, obviously. What they want, and will get in case this satanic government is re-elected, is that people ushering opinions such as "homosexuality is a disease" or "homosexuals are naturally more promiscuous" be jailed. Again, those are BS opinions. But to make them illegal is the work of fascists masquerading as progressives (which is a great description of the current Brazilian government and also of several modern leftist tendencies worldwide).
Brazil is hardly a "western country".
And the existence of laws criminalising racist opinions/hate speech is not unusual in Western countries outside the United States, anyway. Australia has long has a similar law, section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, which makes unlawful acts that are reasonably likely to offend, insult, or humiliate someone based on race or ethnicity, except comments made in good faith in the course of public discussion. Brazilian law might be similar in form but differs in practice (like I said, not a Western country).
And the existence of laws criminalising racist opinions/hate speech is not unusual in Western countries outside the United States, anyway. Australia has long has a similar law, section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, which makes unlawful acts that are reasonably likely to offend, insult, or humiliate someone based on race or ethnicity, except comments made in good faith in the course of public discussion. Brazilian law might be similar in form but differs in practice (like I said, not a Western country).
Similar threads
