This week in the strange death of Europe: Scotland's new hate-crime law

[Metaphor]

As if Scotland has not done enough to permanently stain her reputation among people who have two neurons to rub together (I encourage Scotland to leave the UK because even the depths of madness the rest of the UK has plumbed don't match Scotland's stygian nadir), the Scottish legislature has passed another Orwellian bill.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1408880/snp-hate-crime-bill-freedom-of-speech

HOLYROOD has passed the SNP's controversial Hate Crime Bill despite warnings it is still "fundamentally flawed" and will have a "chilling" effect on freedom of speech.

The legislation won the backing of a majority of MSPs after a public backlash led to a series of U-turns from Nicola Sturgeon’s government. Despite the changes concerns were raised about the Bill, including the prospect of prosecution of people for comments within their own home. Scottish Tory justice spokesman Liam Kerr said the whole section on “stirring up” offences remains “fundamentally flawed”. Mr Kerr highlighted that concerns have been raised by victims groups, academics, lawyers and police staffing groups.

He said: “Earlier this week, Hardeep Singh of the Network of Sikh Organisations said “if enacted, it will make Scotland one of the most hostile places for freedom of expression in Europe”. Wow. Surely so many voices being raised from so many sides of the political spectrum give us pause for thought?

“Only a few weeks ago, the Scottish Police Federation wrote to the Justice Committee convener saying there is substantial potential for many more people coming to adverse police attention as a consequence of elements of this legislation, regardless of potential freedom of expression provisions.

“If that is correct, there must be a risk that this bill as presented could have a chilling effect on freedom of expression.

“Furthermore, this bill contains no defence regarding private conversations in your own home. The police could come to your home, having received a report of stirring up hate around the dinner table and take witness statements from those present.

“That, presumably, could include your children. I cannot vote for that.”

...

The bill covers 'hate' speech against somebody because of their gender identity but not because of their sex:

But Labour MSP Neil Bibby said it was “deeply regrettable” that the legislation would not cover attacks based on the victim’s sex, saying it is “clear that women are subjected to hate because of their sex”.

Labour MSP Neil Bibby is clearly wrong. Women are subjected to hate because of their invisible, internally-held gender identity, not their sexed bodies, which may or may not have a penis.

 

[ZiprHead]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

 

[Metaphor]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

Don't make any jokes at the wake.

 

[Jarhyn]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

Can you give me the cliffs notes? Maybe an editorial framing seeing as the original narrators of this seedy story are likely unreliable?

 

[Politesse]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

Can you give me the cliffs notes? Maybe an editorial framing seeing as the original narrators of this seedy story are likely unreliable?

It extended legal protection for people being discriminated against on the basis of age or gender, formally decriminalized blasphemy against the church, and makes fascists and TERFs feel paranoid.

 

[Jarhyn]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

Can you give me the cliffs notes? Maybe an editorial framing seeing as the original narrators of this seedy story are likely unreliable?

It extended legal protection for people being discriminated against on the basis of age or gender, formally decriminalized blasphemy against the church, and makes fascists and TERFs feel paranoid.

Wait, so, he's AGAINST a law that creates egalitarian protections on the basis of age or gender in the conduct of public business, and repeal of anti-blasphemy law?

And let me guess, he's posting this from a right wing spin rag that is suspiciously in bed with religious concerns?

Metaphor, when are you going to stop dancing a jig to whatever tune the anti-christo-fascists play?

Does Metaphor NOT want to live in a world where you can be gay without being stoned to death for "hitting on a man as a man"?

 

[laughing dog]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

You mean dress kilts.

BTW, Starz has a show "Men in Kilts" which is hilarious and informative about Scotland.

 

[Playball40]

What in the name of all things holy do you have against transgendered persons?? Every single thread you start is a slap against/assault against them.

 

[Trausti]

Regardless of how the OP titled it, this is obviously a threat to free speech. All the heretics on this board ought to have some concern over it, because it's no different than blasphemy laws.

 

[Politesse]

Regardless of how the OP titled it, this is obviously a threat to free speech. All the heretics on this board ought to have some concern over it, because it's no different than blasphemy laws.

No different than blasphemy laws? It literally delegalized the fucking blasphemy laws. Which you're mad about, because there's one last mindless church prejudice that you're trying to defend.

 

[Jarhyn]

Regardless of how the OP titled it, this is obviously a threat to free speech. All the heretics on this board ought to have some concern over it, because it's no different than blasphemy laws.

No different than blasphemy laws? It literally delegalized the fucking blasphemy laws. Which you're mad about, because there's one last mindless church prejudice that you're trying to defend.

I don't get what's so controversial anyway about "if you have a publicly licensed business, that business must serve the whole public neutrally, only excepting the ones who have created direct cause for removal on the basis of doing things that disrupt the function of business in the first place.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Regardless of how the OP titled it, this is obviously a threat to free speech. All the heretics on this board ought to have some concern over it, because it's no different than blasphemy laws.

No.

Blasphemy laws are invoked by any act or statement rejecting, criticizing, lampooning one or mors religions.
The hate crime bill isn't triggered for saying you do not believe transgendered women are actually women, until you do it in a threatening manner, or as abuse.

Which is fine. You can say, "the ____ god doesn't exist" all day long. When you say, "someone outta burn down the _____ temple/church/altar" you're making a swole different statement.

Now, if you can show abasis for your 'right' to threaten people for such differences, g'head....

 

[Jarhyn]

Regardless of how the OP titled it, this is obviously a threat to free speech. All the heretics on this board ought to have some concern over it, because it's no different than blasphemy laws.

No.

Blasphemy laws are invoked by any act or statement rejecting, criticizing, lampooning one or mors religions.
The hate crime bill isn't triggered for saying you do not believe transgendered women are actually women, until you do it in a threatening manner, or as abuse.

Which is fine. You can say, "the ____ god doesn't exist" all day long. When you say, "someone outta burn down the _____ temple/church/altar" you're making a swole different statement.

Now, if you can show abasis for your 'right' to threaten people for such differences, g'head....

What I want to know is, where is Trausti with his dire warnings about blasphemy laws and such in that thread involving that Kentucky law that elevates police to the level of "religious institution" and declares blasphemy against them a crime...

Like, if he can declare "repeal of an blasphemy law" as a "blasphemy law", where is that stunning concern with respect to actually outlawing mere statements against an institution?

 

[Trausti]

Regardless of how the OP titled it, this is obviously a threat to free speech. All the heretics on this board ought to have some concern over it, because it's no different than blasphemy laws.

No.

Blasphemy laws are invoked by any act or statement rejecting, criticizing, lampooning one or mors religions.
The hate crime bill isn't triggered for saying you do not believe transgendered women are actually women, until you do it in a threatening manner, or as abuse.

Which is fine. You can say, "the ____ god doesn't exist" all day long. When you say, "someone outta burn down the _____ temple/church/altar" you're making a swole different statement.

Now, if you can show abasis for your 'right' to threaten people for such differences, g'head....

Scotland Hate Crime Bill: what is hate crime - and why is the Scottish Government’s new law so controversial?

It also creates new offences of “stirring up hatred” against someone from a protected group, which previously only applied to race.

This is defined as "behaving in a threatening or abusive manner, or communicating threatening or abusive material to another person".

Despite the flaws with the US, our 1st Amendment is so precious.

 

[Trausti]

Regardless of how the OP titled it, this is obviously a threat to free speech. All the heretics on this board ought to have some concern over it, because it's no different than blasphemy laws.

No.

Blasphemy laws are invoked by any act or statement rejecting, criticizing, lampooning one or mors religions.
The hate crime bill isn't triggered for saying you do not believe transgendered women are actually women, until you do it in a threatening manner, or as abuse.

Which is fine. You can say, "the ____ god doesn't exist" all day long. When you say, "someone outta burn down the _____ temple/church/altar" you're making a swole different statement.

Now, if you can show abasis for your 'right' to threaten people for such differences, g'head....

What I want to know is, where is Trausti with his dire warnings about blasphemy laws and such in that thread involving that Kentucky law that elevates police to the level of "religious institution" and declares blasphemy against them a crime...

Like, if he can declare "repeal of an blasphemy law" as a "blasphemy law", where is that stunning concern with respect to actually outlawing mere statements against an institution?

Any law that criminalizes criticism - whether benign or "abusive" - is a blasphemy law.

 

[Metaphor]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

Can you give me the cliffs notes? Maybe an editorial framing seeing as the original narrators of this seedy story are likely unreliable?

Jarhyn asking others to do his homework.

 

[Metaphor]

Sonuvabitch. Another country died. Now I have to dig out my dress suit again.

Can you give me the cliffs notes? Maybe an editorial framing seeing as the original narrators of this seedy story are likely unreliable?

It extended legal protection for people being discriminated against on the basis of age or gender, formally decriminalized blasphemy against the church, and makes fascists and TERFs feel paranoid.

It did not 'extend legal protection' for 'people being discriminated against'. According to the BBC:

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56364821

Under the bill, offences are considered "aggravated" - which could influence sentencing - if they involve prejudice on the basis of age, disability, race, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or variations in sex characteristics (sometimes described as "intersex" physical or biological characteristics).



It also creates new offences of "stirring up hatred" - which previously applied only to race - and abolishes the offence of blasphemy which has not been prosecuted in Scotland for more than 175 years.

And goes a step further than any such legislation I've seen in the West and makes what you say in your own home privately prosecutable

Yet even with that scrutiny, concerns remain. Offences can now be committed even in private, an abandonment of an earlier "dwelling defence" in race hate law.



Even with the Scottish government's insistence that the bar for prosecution is high, there are those who still believe this is an example of interference in private and family life. Why should any government, they ask, decide what can and can't be said in the privacy of one's home?

 

[Metaphor]

What in the name of all things holy do you have against transgendered persons?? Every single thread you start is a slap against/assault against them.

I have nothing against transgender people.

I have something against transgender activism, and its iron grip on vast swathes of both state and non-state institutions. I have something against people (most of them not trans) who believe biological males qualify to play in women's sport because it would hurt those males' feelings to be excluded, fairness be damned.

Transgender activism is so appalling, bullying, and wrongheaded, I'm starting to be sympathetic to feminist assertions that society cares only about the feelings of males. And I'm not known for my sympathies to feminist assertions.