• disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I think you misunderstand the point. No one is asking for legislation against stating the sky isn’t blue. When a general idea, such as “hate speech” is made illegal, the definition can be manipulated by those in power to do so. That’s exactly how past governments control the narrative of the citizens to their liking. All they need is our permission to tell us what is, and is not, acceptable to say.

    • Sprawlie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Welcome to participating in society, where you are expected to work alongside your neighbour, not against them.

      our government is supposed to be there to define these lines, in conjuction with the will of the people AND the limits of the courts.

      Theres’ valid argument about some parties abuse. But thats where a robust parliament with multiple different houses can help.

      But at the end of the day, if you let hate speech fall under the pervue of freedom of speech and take an absolutist approach to freedom of speech, you will inevitably, lose tolerance as the intolerant will eliminate the tolerant. We have seen this enough times to know that free speech absolutism is a joke, and why it’s not the rule of most countries.