- #1677551gabyoneMemberMember since: November 13, 2008
Replies: 2701gabyone April 26, 2018 at 4:10 pm
I did not press the button Lilith because the offensive posters previous seemed to post at start on a holiday to maximum coverage & I suspected it would be a waste of time complaining just as it was at Easter.
Gabyone Auckland region#1677557huiatahiMemberMember since: March 22, 2017
Replies: 931huiatahi April 26, 2018 at 4:36 pm
Ive only pressed the abuse button once on one of freeminds posts about a fortnight ago (long weekend). I think it was deleted by admin but I was never notified. I think quite a few pressed the abuse button on same post. Yes, Id like to see something from admin about the post being deleted as when you scroll back you tend to wonder “what the heck”
huiatahi#1677623halcyon April 26, 2018 at 10:42 pm
I like this quote from Mike Hoskins in today’s Herald.
“If I had something to say every time a petition was started, a column was written, a barb was tossed or Twitter lit up … I’d have died of exhaustion years ago.”
“You pick your fights in life, I pick mine based on what’s important to me, and what’s important to me is professionalism and being above the fray. What someone I’ve never met may think of me is not important.”
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1686795mommabear70MemberMember since: February 20, 2017
Replies: 1838mommabear70 July 11, 2018 at 10:18 am
It will be very interesting to follow the Free Speech Coalition set to sue Auckland Council. They raised $50,000 in under 24 hours.
Unfortunate that the Auckland Ratepayers will be meeting all the Council’s costs, so a great pity Phil Goff alone isn’t being sued.
Good to read that Acting PM Winston Peters in a post-Cabinet press conference on Monday said “Had we been asked… we’d have allowed them to come on the basis of free speech. It’s one of the most fundamental freedoms that we have and we should be very careful who we expel on that cause, because the downstream historic record on that has been just disastrous.”
Imagine how different the response would have been from Ardern. No way would she have said that. It would have been sopping wet stuff about needing to make people feel safe from people who say upsetting things etc.#1686797halcyon July 11, 2018 at 10:31 am
This whole question is one that appears idiosyncratically defined. So where does the boundary lie?
Surely I should be free to express my beliefs. If I believe that a behaviour is normal then I should be free to say that. Conversely, if you believe that a behaviour is not normal then you should be free to state that.
There is a big difference between stating a belief and advocating violence towards another person. For example, I support the notion that NZ becomes a republic. You may disagree. But unless I call for the annihilation of the Royal Family, then the expression can not be classed as Hate Speech. To disagree or agree with a particular belief is not hate speech unless there is an associated call to violence.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1686798freemindMemberMember since: September 7, 2006
Replies: 1001freemind July 11, 2018 at 10:31 am
Those of the least intelligence will always be offended by free speech truth as they do not have the ability to understand underlying issues.#1686818halcyon July 11, 2018 at 12:24 pm
Is it a case of not “the ability to understand underlying issues” freemind? Or is the reason they are offended by comments that they disagree with is due to their lack of confidence in their own beliefs. If it is the latter then they need to work at developing a confidence in their convictions rather than trying to prevent people making statements that they find disagreeable.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1686824arandarMemberMember since: November 23, 2009
Replies: 10703arandar July 11, 2018 at 2:06 pm
Phil Goff on behalf of the Council have only not agreed to hire them a Council property in which to hold their rally. He does not believe a multicultural city like Auckland should support speakers with extreme views about the superiority of one race over others and immigration and feminism and so on.
Health and safety issues have been cited too. Opposites attract. Seems to me, when extremists gather so too will their ideological opponents. The potential for peaceful protests to go bad is always there and the National Front et al are hardly known for their restraint.
Don Brash, who has tried to stop Te Reo Maori being spoken on various public media and now advocates for free speech for Fascists? How quaint.
Let these two in if they pass the visa requirements. I doubt they will since they’ve been banned from the UK and Australia, under conservative govts you’ll note, but let them find a private venue, hire it, pay the insurance, sell the tickets.
And let them take any consequences – unless Brash and his cronies want to pick up any bills that result.
Arandar#1686826halcyon July 11, 2018 at 3:16 pm
Unfortunately arandar, the current practice, by both the Alt-Right and the Alt-Left is to threaten disruptive behaviour when someone presents a position that is contrary the view of the group. By so doing they hope to shut down any debate.
Such behaviour suggests to me that those who do so are not convinced that their rhetoric is robust and therefore they do not have confidence in their position. However, their behaviour does little to change the position of others.
Over the years I have had numerous challenges to my beliefs. In some cases I have been convinced that my position was wrong and I changed my view. In other cases I found the contrary evidence weak and I retained my view. Without the opportunity to hear alternative points of view one fails to grow.
Surely it would be more of an adult behaviour to allow the expression of contrary views and then present the opposing argument than try to close down any opposing viewpoint. Such practice is an insult to the level of intelligence of the listener.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1686827gabyoneMemberMember since: November 13, 2008
Replies: 2701gabyone July 11, 2018 at 3:33 pm
I think there is a vast difference between opposing views & inciting racial hatred. We see it often on this site that a whole race are defiled simply because a minority offend. To me that is hate speech. People should be free to decry the crime but hate speech based on race or sexuality is unacceptable. Amongst any group one will find some bad . In this country we pride ourselves on being a tolerant society so why should we put out the welcome mat to folk who may question our right to be tolerant.
Gabyone Auckland region
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.