Post by Kiwi Frontline on Jul 2, 2021 12:56:01 GMT 12
LAUREL HUBBARD IS JUST A SYMPTOM OF NEW CHILLING ATTACKS ON FREE SPEECH IN NEW ZEALAND – Amy Brooke
The situation regarding the NZOC’s decision is now even more relevant, given new proposals by the Left to widen New Zealand’s “hate speech” legislation, proposing it be removed from the Human Rights Act to create a new offence in the Crimes Act. Despite the usual disclaimers, it will inevitably (and is very probably so designed) not only inhibit debate, but empower the government to punish those formerly able to claim freedom of speech in any area now regarded as displeasing. Possible debate around basic sexuality has become one of these fraught areas. Ardern’s government has opened for consultation proposals “to strengthen protections against speech that incites hatred and discrimination, and seeking New Zealanders’ views about how they would make Aotearoa New Zealand more socially progressive.”
Weasel words indeed. This government knows very well an independent poll shows that 90% of New Zealanders reject this divisive far-Left government’s attempt to prioritise Aotearoa -– never the traditional Maori name for the whole country. Moreover, its own constant promotion of supposedly Maori beliefs — and its granting part-Maori greater rights over the majority — is already discrimination on racial grounds, predictably promoting a backlash from the community at large. As for “socially progressive”? What is the government’s definition? One wonders if our now illiberal, pro-death legislation targeting unborn children — and embarking on the slippery slope of euthanasia — can possibly be called socially progressive? Regressive is arguably the more accurate description.....
spectator.com.au/2021/06/laurel-hubbard-is-just-part-of-a-chilling-attack-on-free-speech-in-new-zealand/
The situation regarding the NZOC’s decision is now even more relevant, given new proposals by the Left to widen New Zealand’s “hate speech” legislation, proposing it be removed from the Human Rights Act to create a new offence in the Crimes Act. Despite the usual disclaimers, it will inevitably (and is very probably so designed) not only inhibit debate, but empower the government to punish those formerly able to claim freedom of speech in any area now regarded as displeasing. Possible debate around basic sexuality has become one of these fraught areas. Ardern’s government has opened for consultation proposals “to strengthen protections against speech that incites hatred and discrimination, and seeking New Zealanders’ views about how they would make Aotearoa New Zealand more socially progressive.”
Weasel words indeed. This government knows very well an independent poll shows that 90% of New Zealanders reject this divisive far-Left government’s attempt to prioritise Aotearoa -– never the traditional Maori name for the whole country. Moreover, its own constant promotion of supposedly Maori beliefs — and its granting part-Maori greater rights over the majority — is already discrimination on racial grounds, predictably promoting a backlash from the community at large. As for “socially progressive”? What is the government’s definition? One wonders if our now illiberal, pro-death legislation targeting unborn children — and embarking on the slippery slope of euthanasia — can possibly be called socially progressive? Regressive is arguably the more accurate description.....
spectator.com.au/2021/06/laurel-hubbard-is-just-part-of-a-chilling-attack-on-free-speech-in-new-zealand/