Hatred is bad

Steve Edwards has an article in the latest “Policy Magazine” on anti-hatred laws. He cites various examples of recent anti-hate cases where people are being charged with “not being a Muslim” or “not liking Muslims” or “saying that Muslims are wrong” or something like that.

But the enjoyable part of Steve’s article is when he extends the anti-hate law thinking to it’s logical conclusion. If it’s bad to hate races or religions then surely it’s also bad to hate people for belonging to any other group? If saying mean things about XYZ leads to violence… then surely saying mean things about ABC also leads to violence? So let’s be consistent with our anti-hate laws and ban negative speach about any group of people!

Steve gives the example of the 59-year-old One Nation supporter who was knocked unconscious by anti-fascist demonstrations. According to PC-think this means that people should be prevented from speaking out against One Nation or fascism.

John Quiggin is soon going to have to face court for his negative comments about “AGW delusionists”. Both sides of politics will have to apologise to each other and promise to only say nice things in the future. Comedy shows will be strictly censored to make sure all of the jokes are positive and up-lifting. Mein Kamph and the Communist Manifesto and the Bible will all have to be banned. But it will also be illegal to say that we should ban them in case that offends fascists, communists or christians. All religions will be banned from saying aloud any of their scriptures that are anti-gay. But gays will be forbidden from saying that those religions are anti-gay.

Basically, you can say whatever you like, as long as you approve your comment with everybody in Australia first and make sure that no group will be offended or feel hated.

But seriously…

Hatred is bad. Especially hatred based on the fact that somebody is a part of a group (ie bigotry). But as long as it’s not violent, people must be free to think & say what they like without censorship. We should not be burning books, even when they’re “bad”. We should not be policing thoughts, even when they’re “wrong”. We should not be preventing discussions and debates… even when they’re heated.

10 thoughts on “Hatred is bad

  1. John Quiggin is soon going to have to face court for his negative comments about “AGW delusionists”.


    And I guess those who criticize Quiggin for having economic denialist views should also be jailed. lol

    But seriously Jim Hansen recently suggested that people from the oil industry who support anti-warming discussion ought to be jailed. He meant this seriously.

  2. Sticks and stones my break my bones
    But words will never hurt me.

    ‘Victims’ of free speech should get over themselves and put more focus on living a good life rather than worrying about what people say about them.

  3. Well… putting aside whether hatred is itself bad, the issue I’m addressing is bigotry, which is hating somebody (or thinking them inferior) because they are part of a group.

  4. Hatred is OK as long as it is kept in perspective. I get a few trolls round my site and they tend to piss me off a bit, but rather than worry about crying victim and wishing for restrictions on their right to free speech I like to treat them with courtesy and reply.

    In the reply I let them know that I am a much nastier bastard then they can ever aspire to being.

  5. Jim – you aint censoring “free speech” if it’s on your private blog – you’re just exercising your property rights. They can say what they like about you on their own blog.

  6. Terje; I was being a bit flippant above. I am not sure about the heavy heart bit, but to hate someone allows the painful useless seventh son of a seventh son of a bastard to occupy your thoughts when he quite clearly doesn’t deserve that honor.

    Fleeced; I never censor anyone, although I might on occasion censure them,- Good and hard.

    If some one disagrees strongly with me as some Paul supporters have from time to time, I will engage with them. On the other hand some of the ‘Paultards’ who were little better than bots throwing half arsed insults and yapping dribble used to cop it.

    Liberal (Democrat) trolls are treated in a way that makes David L (to Sukrit) on a very bad day seem complimentary.

  7. A man was fined for homophobia, having a sticker expressing his attitude to homosexuals- however, part of the message was linked to his religion, so are they suppressing free expression of beliefs? The line between permitted/banned seems to keep changing by the minute!

  8. Nicholas; I live in the same town, the guy is a nutter and an obnoxious arrogant bastard, and I tend to have little sympathy for him. The case was an anti discrimination one and he was not fined, he was ordered to compensate the ‘offended’ people, which is ridiculous, but thats feel good law for you.

    While I have no time for Ron, I do not believe that he went any further than free speech. The religious reference was Leviticus some number or other, the same book as the reconstructionist nutters use.

Comments are closed.