Justice Minister Helen McEntee is seeking Cabinet approval today to repeal the country’s old censorship laws – even as she seeks to enact censorship laws of her own.
The Minister will tell the government today that there has been a significant change in society’s values in the 100 years since these laws were introduced, and that the Censorship of Publications legislation still technically allows for the censorship and prohibition of books, newspapers or magazines that are considered “indecent,” “obscene,” or have too great an emphasis on crime.
The move is mostly symbolic, as in recent decades the censorship board has been virtually inactive due to a dearth of complaints or appeals. However, McEntee said she sees the existence of the board as inappropriate for modern times, and that there are already robust powers in place to deal with threatening or abusive material, or child abuse material.
Despite these claims, the Minister is currently in the process of attempting to pass wide-ranging hate speech legislation which would prohibit criticisms of unspecified genders “other than that of male or female,” and which does not define “hatred.”
Justice Minister Helen McEntee says that "the vast majority of people" want hate speech laws.#gript pic.twitter.com/BZy6MBgKLp
— gript (@griptmedia) June 14, 2023
Loading ...
It’s a great country. You can teach pornography to children in school but you will be prosecuted for telling the truth. If the electoral commission don’t like your election literature even though true then they will remove it. Twisted sick society.
If the ‘vast majority’ of people want this hate speech legislation then it wouldnt hurt to have a referendum would it?
The Hate Speech law will be far worse than the censorship of written material ever was.
It will divide the country into those with the privilege of belonging to a protected group and the rest of the population. A crime committed against a member of a protected group will carry a higher penalty than the same crime committed against the rest.
What could be better calculated to increase division? It is false that a majority support this law: about 73% oppose it in fact.
This Minister is a disaster.
Defining a ‘crime’ on the basis of the identifying characteristics of the alleged victim is indeed divisive and is contrary to the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution which states that all citizens shall be equal before the law.
Sounds like something straight out of a Goebbels playbook.
One of his dictums was ‘Always accuse the other side of being what you are.’
This is a mirror image of that maxim whereby the government clamps down on free speech as they claim the mantle of being the opponents of censorship.