Bill of Rights (2 Viewers)

[zsazsa]

Because legislating tolerance doesn't work.

 

[*TRUE*]

We need an explicit bill of rights so some asshole lefty judges don't get all doe-eyed and start legislating against freedom of speech because some imams got butthurt just like in the EU:

"The Institute complained that this was a breach of the right to
freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Court of
Human Rights held, by six votes to three, that there had been no breach of Article 10.17 The majority judgment
concluded that the interference with free speech was "necessary in a democratic society" in order to guarantee the
"rights of others" to protection from gratuitous insults to their religious feelings.
"

Very true.
As a religious person , i can handle my faith being spoken against , no big deal. BUT I COULD NOT COULD NOT handle my freedom being stolen from me simply to protect the feelings of others - it's about control , not feelings , anyway.

 

[Iron]

Id still rather judges determine rights rather than the mob. I find something insulting about a bill of rights -like our political and legal overlords cant be trusted to get it right, so we have to carve arbitrary rules, set by the herd, into stone. Just because the foundation of rights is not in a body of laws refined and polished over hundreds of years and guarded by highly qualified people, but in a sheet of paper, does not meant that it cant be far more tyrannical and oppressive.
At the end of the day it doesnt change much anyway. I think we could do without the hysterical American campaigns around SC nominees' interpretation of the bill. Just an added layer of wasteful bureaucracy imo

 

[katie tully]

well to be perfectly honest iron, i have about as much faith in our political and legal overloads as i would letting a blind man drive me during peak hour traffic

no thx

 

[Enteebee]

Id still rather judges determine rights rather than the mob

In the end they do either way.

 

[slickstar_01]

i dont think we need a bill of rights. period/

 

[Iron]

well to be perfectly honest iron, i have about as much faith in our political and legal overloads as i would letting a blind man drive me during peak hour traffic

no thx

Sure there's distrust. That's natural. But we have a pretty dinky system which pits them against eachother anyway. It works fine without us slapping our junk on the table theyre fighting on.

.

Na man, it's St Peter at the gates

 

[Iron]

You of all people, SURELY, are critical of the power the common rabble would have over this Nolan?

 

[katie tully]

hey man, this is how corrupt you law students are

remember back in like, 05, when asqui was still posting, and sonata and some other dribble heads

and einfield(sic???) was busted for drink driving and then lying about it, and you guys were all like 'LOL NO HE SHOULD KEEP HIS JOB HE'S AN ENFORCER OF THA LAAAAAAW'??? this. this is why i have very little faith in our legal system

that and the pansy arse sentences that have been handed down lately. that and them legislating against/for really dumb shit.

stop it.

 

[Enteebee]

Yah Dem Fucking Pansy Arse Sentences Fucking Poofs Gaol Is For Pussies!

 

[katie tully]

yes.
each count of sodomy charged against a person should be penalized with 15 years of soap on a rope.

per charge.

 

[Silver Persian]

Legislating 'tolerance' means that I could then go to gaol for saying Islam is a made up religion created by a paedophile. Plus, if I don't want to hire someone at my company who reckons thetans inhabit my body or that the earth is 5,000 years old, that should be my fucking right.

There is a difference between critiquing a religion productively, and deciding that anybody who follows a particular religion is a terrorist/idiol/pedophile who should not be hired or treated equally in terms of the legal system etc.

I agree that ant-discrimination shouldn't involve a passive acceptance and valorisation of whatever a particular cultural/national/religious group believes, but don't you think some level of respect/tolerance/equality of treatment is a good thing?

 

[Iron]

lol lets just take their constitution. There's still room in the arc for one more state

 

[moll.]

Iron, stop deleting my posts.

 

[Iron]

 

[Rafy]

Just use the US Bill of Rights k. That would be perfect.

Agreed, but without the right to bear arms. The US bill covers most of the provisions that need to be protected, without the economic, social and cultural rights that i certainly wouldn't want included in such a document.

I would want it entrenched in the constitution. To be honest, I'd trust judges to protect our rights more than politicans.


A charter for the elites
Opposition flags bill of rights fight

 

[Iron]

The American ammendments would be totally inappropriate to our history and sovereignty. What a pathetic vote of no-confidence in ourselves to send to the world. You Liberals have always hated this place. Youve never been aggressively Australian.

But I dont know where this myth has come from that their bill works very well anyway. It's a shambles covered by institutionalized myth as to its greatness re 'freedom' and whatever. What they have is not greener; they have government which defers governance to an unelected court - on, like, the most important and divisive issues a democratic society is meant to determine democratically --abortion, gay marriage, segregation, whatever, politicians hide behind the bill and let it fester in the courts to avoid any political backlash. It's an outdated trade-off to participation and away from efficiency.

 

[Iron]

Freedom of political communication is plenty!

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Can we at least have full freedom of speech for once?

This will lead to terrorism

 

[katie tully]

reinstate our simulated porn thread then