Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Ray A

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _Ray A »

I'll give a run down of one case in Australia, much of which I heard being carried out live on radio. John Laws was Australia's most popular "shock jock", and Steve Price was not far behind him. A Gay man by the name of Gary Burns threatened to sue both of them for vilification of homosexuals.

This was the situation in a nutshell. Both Laws and Price were referring to "poofs" (the Oz word for a homosexual, something like "fags") on air.

This was the outcome of the lawsuit.

Today, the ADT ordered that they all make public apologies and pay legal costs in the matter.

Laws and Price have been ordered to make public apologies on air, and Radio 2UE has been ordered to print an apology in three major metropolitan newspapers.


People, the times are a changin'. It's important to note one thing here. Such language is often used by "common people" in the street and at pubs, and vilification laws mainly affect public utterances, (inciting ridicule or hatred) not what people think or say in private. Considering the popularity of both Laws and Price, Gary Burns felt that they were in a position to "incite hatred". Now here's the irony. Gays will often lightheartedly refer to themselves as "poofs", so it is the intent that counts here. Vilification laws only extend to public comments, not private. Even on message boards they will unlikely have any force, unless someone like a Gary Burns took it up with an influential poster, for example (and I'm only talking about Australian law, not the US).

If I, as a cab driver, referred to a black customer of mine as a "nigger", not only would I lose my job, I would face hefty fines.

Vilification in the workplace also extends to religious vilification. It is illegal to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their religious beliefs.
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _Trevor »

JohnStuartMill wrote:I think hate crimes are a bad idea, but I don't think that treating crimes motivated by bigotry should only be prosecuted under whatever statute they'd be prosecuted under if they weren't motivated by bigotry. Nearly all "hate crimes" are executed with the intent to "send a message" to a group of people; as such, there should be some extra prosecutorial juice in punishing these offenders. In California, there's a "Making Terrorist Threats" cause of action that I think should be used in lieu of the hate crimes statute.


Interesting idea, JSM. And, I agree with you about hate crimes.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _bcspace »

All crime is hate crime. Any legislation that supposes less is actually making thought a crime. In other words, there should be no such legislation. The Book of Mormon example is opposed to it, therefore, any supporter of hate crimes legislation is against the Church.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _Trevor »

Ray A wrote:Vilification in the workplace also extends to religious vilification. It is illegal to discriminate against a person on the grounds of their religious beliefs.


And where does it stop? Who can misuse this? Could someone conceivably find themselves in trouble for "vilification" because they have called Dick Cheney a "fascist", or Obama a "socialist"? Is it OK to call a public figure a poofster, but not a private citizen? I find the whole thing confusing and troubling.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_Ray A

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _Ray A »

Trevor wrote:And where does it stop? Who can misuse this? Could someone conceivably find themselves in trouble for "vilification" because they have called Dick Cheney a "fascist", or Obama a "socialist"? Is it OK to call a public figure a poofster, but not a private citizen? I find the whole thing confusing and troubling.


No, Trevor. Fascism and socialism are political ideologies. They are not "hate crimes". Socialists and Communists are free to express their opinion. They are free to form political parties. But if their agenda targeted a specific race, people, or sexual orientation, they can kiss their ass goodbye. If they engaged in eugenics, as Hitler did, then they can consider themselves as toilet paper, which the judiciary will use to wipe their asses. And that is why Fascist ideology is very unlikely to gain any hold in Australia.

Maybe we "over-legislate", but I've found it difficult to disagree with most legislation. If, hypothetically, Mormons were banned in Australia, I'd personally go to Canberra to protest. But that will never happen. Guaranteed.
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _Trevor »

Ray A wrote:No, Trevor. Fascism and socialism are political ideologies. They are not "hate crimes". Socialists and Communists are free to express their opinion. They are free to form political parties. But if their agenda targeted a specific race, people, or sexual orientation, they can kiss their ass goodbye. If they engaged in eugenics, as Hitler did, then they can consider themselves as toilet paper, which the judiciary will use to wipe their asses. And that is why Fascist ideology is very unlikely to gain any hold in Australia.


I am extrapolating, Ray. If it is considered an act of hate to call people "poofs" on the airwaves, then why could it not just as easily be called an act of hate to call them socialists or fascists? I don't see where the difference is. All of these things involve name-calling, which I am not confident should be identified as an act of hate, since it might end up unintentionally leading to an infringement of free speech, no matter how well intentioned.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_moksha
_Emeritus
Posts: 22508
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:42 pm

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _moksha »

bcspace wrote: The Book of Mormon example is opposed to it, therefore, any supporter of hate crimes legislation is against the Church.


Hope supporters are not made both unpure and undelightsome as a curse.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
_Polygamy-Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8091
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:07 am

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _Polygamy-Porter »

bcspace wrote:All crime is hate crime. Any legislation that supposes less is actually making thought a crime. In other words, there should be no such legislation. The Book of Mormon example is opposed to it, therefore, any supporter of hate crimes legislation is against the Church.

We don't hate you or the Mormon church, we just hate stupid ideas. Is that a crime?

Oh and three cheers for Uncle Obama.

He lowered my house payment by $1500/month.

And I didn't even vote, at all!
New name: Boaz
The most viewed "ignored" poster in Shady Acres® !
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _asbestosman »

Polygamy-Porter wrote:We don't hate you or the Mormon church, we just hate stupid ideas. Is that a crime?

Worse: it's a sin. (if you mean what I think you mean)

Oh and three cheers for Uncle Obama.

He lowered my house payment by $1500/month.

And I didn't even vote, at all!

What the . . . ? I didn't get a lower house payment. If my bill were lowered by that much, just think of how much more tithing I'd be able to pay.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_Polygamy-Porter
_Emeritus
Posts: 8091
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 1:07 am

Re: Senate passes expanded hate crimes bill

Post by _Polygamy-Porter »

asbestosman wrote:
Polygamy-Porter wrote:We don't hate you or the Mormon church, we just hate stupid ideas. Is that a crime?

Worse: it's a sin. (if you mean what I think you mean)

Oh and three cheers for Uncle Obama.

He lowered my house payment by $1500/month.

And I didn't even vote, at all!

What the . . . ? I didn't get a lower house payment. If my bill were lowered by that much, just think of how much more tithing I'd be able to pay.
Sweet justice!

Me the loathsome and filthy apostate gets a blessing in the form of a lowered house payment and the active Joseph loving Mormon boy gets nada.

BOOYEAH!
New name: Boaz
The most viewed "ignored" poster in Shady Acres® !
Post Reply