New hate speech bill opened for public comment

C4Cat said:
On what basis? The law doesn't offer protection from criticism based on political affiliation.
Unless your opinions are simply about their race, or gender, or sexuality, etc, you have nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...
You don't think political affiliations fall under beliefs?

I believe it does. Don't discriminate against me or else! :mad:
 
Last edited:
C4Cat said:
Not based solely on their race, gender, sexuality etc ... No.
I tend to offend people who don't like my point of view, based on disagreements in opinion, not because I attack who they are.
I've never offended someone purely because of their race or anything like that.

Why, have you?
Click to expand...

Have I offended anyone because of their race, no.

Has anyone taken offence at what I did or said , sure, but that was their choice, not mine.
 
daveza said:
Have I offended anyone because of their race, no.

Has anyone taken offence at what I did or said , sure, but that was their choice, not mine.
Click to expand...

Right, that's not because of hate speech on your part though
 
ngwe23 said:
I love it when people like you write this garbage of shifting the burden of reconciliation to black people when in fact black people have been stretching that hand since day one. It could be said that hand has not be reciprocated by some, in fact, it has been used to further threat us with contempt and disdain by some who see no issue with comparing our intelligence to that of apes. Lest we forget, the black man was chilling in Africa until someone came and oppressed him. His land and wealth was gerrymandered for the betterment of others to his peril. Now, who is sowing the seeds of "us vs them"? Who practiced the evil system of segregation that has resulted in SA being the most unequal society.

BTW, kudos to your aunt.
Click to expand...

Please go find a bare patch of ground, remove ALL your clothing including shoes, cellphone, watch, etc. Build a grasshut, smooth the floor with cow poop, (oh wait you are male you can't do that), ok find a woman stupid enough to do it for you, make an umfaan to watch the cows you stole from the guy over the next hill and see how long your chilled bliss lasts.

Oh yeah, no whinging about the diseases, high mortality rate, or the fact some big chief is likely to conscript you into a battle with an opposing tribe.

Have fun!


_______________________


FYI very little annoys me more than stupid person who UTTERLY ignores the reality of life in Africa before us 'oppressive' Whites arrived on the scene. You and all your buddies can go found an African state just like the equally moronic idiots in Orania (hey maybe you can even buy the land next door! Then we can get on with ignoring all of you!) You can decolonise everything, return everything to the blissful state of Africanness you imagine existed. No vehicles, not even a cart, mud huts, cows, mielies, no electricity, no medicines or doctors except Sangomas, etc. etc.
 
Last edited:
porchrat said:
You don't think political affiliations fall under beliefs?

I believe it does. Don't discriminate against me or else! :mad:
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should communicate your concerns that 'belief' is too wide an umbrella term to the relevant department while the bill is open for comment then.

Do you think all political discourse necessarily involves the following though?

Offence of hate speech
4. (1) (a) Any person who intentionally, by means of any
communication whatsoever, communicates to one or more persons in a manner
that –
(i) advocates hatred towards any other person or group of persons; or
(ii) is threatening, abusive or insulting towards any other person or group of
persons,
and which demonstrates a clear intention, having regard to all the circumstances,
to –
(aa) incite others to harm any person or group of persons, whether or not such
person or group of persons is harmed; or
(bb) stir up violence against, or bring into contempt or ridicule, any person or
group of persons,
based on race, gender, sex, which includes intersex, ethnic or social origin,
colour, sexual orientation, religion, belief, culture, language, birth, disability, HIV
status, nationality, gender identity, albinism or occupation or trade, is guilty of the
offence of hate speech.
 
C4Cat said:
Right, that's not because of hate speech on your part though
Click to expand...

My definition of hate speech is not necessarily the same as anyone elses.

So the answer to your comment is no.

If they choose to take offense at something I don't find offensive how is that my problem ?
 
C4Cat said:
Perhaps you should communicate your concerns that 'belief' is too wide an umbrella term to the relevant department while the bill is open for comment then.

Do you think all political discourse necessarily involves the following though?

Offence of hate speech
4. (1) (a) Any person who intentionally, by means of any
communication whatsoever, communicates to one or more persons in a manner
that –
(i) advocates hatred towards any other person or group of persons; or
(ii) is threatening, abusive or insulting towards any other person or group of
persons,
and which demonstrates a clear intention, having regard to all the circumstances,
to –
(aa) incite others to harm any person or group of persons, whether or not such
person or group of persons is harmed; or
(bb) stir up violence against, or bring into contempt or ridicule, any person or
group of persons,
based on race, gender, sex, which includes intersex, ethnic or social origin,
colour, sexual orientation, religion, belief, culture, language, birth, disability, HIV
status, nationality, gender identity, albinism or occupation or trade, is guilty of the
offence of hate speech.
Click to expand...
You've somehow managed to lose the context of the discussion. We weren't talking about political discourse. We were talking about political affiliation. Read the posts again and when you're back up to speed feel free to prepare a relevant response.
 
porchrat said:
You've somehow managed to lose the context of the discussion. We weren't talking about political discourse. We were talking about political affiliation. Read the posts again and when you're back up to speed feel free to prepare a relevant response.
Click to expand...
That doesn't answer the question. Political affiliation is not hate speech ffs. The bill is about the offence of hate speech. Read the entire thread again and when you're back up to speed feel free to prepare a relevant response.
 
daveza said:
Is "I hate you" now going to be a criminal offence ?
Click to expand...

No. I hate you because you're ... and I'll **** you up for it, is.

Has nobody bothered to read the actual bill?
 
C4Cat said:
That doesn't answer the question. Political affiliation is not hate speech ffs. The bill is about the offence of hate speech. Read the entire thread again and when you're back up to speed feel free to prepare a relevant response.
Click to expand...
You've still apparently not looked back to regain your context. We were talking about discimrination on the basis of political affiliation and how that may fall under the section regarding belief. Christ dude if you're not going to bother to read back then just say so so that I don't waste my time having to remind you where the discussion stands each time you reply.
 
porchrat said:
Christ dude if you're not going to bother to read back then just say so so that I don't waste my time having to remind you where the discussion stands each time you reply.
Click to expand...

I take extreme offence to invoking the name of my lord & saviour using it in vain!
 
porchrat said:
You've still apparently not looked back to regain your context. We were talking about discimrination on the basis of political affiliation and how that may fall under the section regarding belief. Christ dude if you're not going to bother to read back then just say so so that I don't waste my time having to remind you where the discussion stands each time you reply.
Click to expand...

This bill is about hate speech, and nowhere in the bill is discimrination on the basis of political affiliation covered. So who is wasting time here? You want to propose that because 'political affiliation' is a belief, that somehow criticizing a persons 'political affiliation' is now hate speech. It's not. There is no possible interpretation of this bill that will make it so unless you are threatening hatred and violence towards someone because of their political affiliation.
 
C4Cat said:
No. I hate you because you're ... and I'll **** you up for it, is.

Has nobody bothered to read the actual bill?
Click to expand...

Teenage girl to friend - " I hate my mother, she's such a bitch! "

That seems to fall within the categories the Act proposes.
 
C4Cat said:
This bill is about hate speech, and nowhere in the bill is discimrination on the basis of political affiliation covered. So who is wasting time here? You want to propose that because 'political affiliation' is a belief, that somehow criticizing a persons 'political affiliation' is now hate speech. It's not. There is no possible interpretation of this bill that will make it so unless you are threatening hatred and violence towards someone because of their political affiliation.
Click to expand...

I just can't understand why not?

if we have a law that is so easy to make trouble to other people, why not use it?
I am telling you I will use it for my private agenda. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X