It’s very easy to say there should be ‘no limits’ to freedom of speech. However,
most people would agree it should be illegal to publish a person’s
address along with instructions on the best ways to rough them
up. Almost all countries have laws against harassment, or incitement to
commit crimes, as well as restrictions on libel or slanderous speech.
But where should the ‘red line’ be drawn? If hate speech legislation
is overly-strict, can it impinge upon the right to freedom of
expression? Who should decide where the limits lie, and what is
acceptable?
"In the west, free speech is often seen as a sacred right, but how
can that be balanced with the need to protect minorities such as Muslims
from hate? Scott Stephens, Waleed Aly and political theologian William
Cavanaugh discuss.
We regularly hear the right to freedom of
speech invoked. It can cover a multitude of rhetorical sins under the
mantra 'everyone is entitled to their own opinion'.
This week, following terrorist attacks in France and Germany, several figures have raised
banning Muslim immigration in Australia. These comments have been
labelled by some as hateful and racist, while others have defended the
speaker's right to speak their mind.
No comments:
Post a Comment