Izzy Folau

[TRF_heineken]

TRF as someone who has legal background

Can you PLEASE show nations that have a codified legal definition of "Hate Speech" in their Constitution/Acts of Parliaments etc

It just seem a blanket term for speech that an Individual finds obnoxious & offensive but we both know that is a very subjective

Sure, Here's South Africa's Hate Speech Bill which was approved last year:

http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/hcbill/B9-2018-HateCrimesBill.pdf

We had a case recently in South Africa where a white woman, Penny Sparrow was convicted of hate speech, and has received a prison sentence of 5 years.

 

[Mr Ruggleby]

A number of your posts on this topic are quite misinformed.

When you go to court OF LAW, what BOOK do you put your hand on to swear oath? come on show me your intelligence. Is it the Quran?

Which country are you talking about here? In New Zealand (and pretty much all traditionally Christian nations that I am aware of) you do not have to swear on a religious text. Secondly, by focusing on this you are clearly missing the point. Smartcooky is trying to point out that your contention - that Christianity is the origin of moral guidance in society - is unfounded. This is because the same core values are present, not only in other (some of which are older) religious texts, but also in predominantly atheist societies. They are also written in to law and upheld by completely secular institutions in the vast majority of nations.

In other words: For the most part, the bible incorporated longstanding established practices that were already present in some form and seen as key to a functioning society into its text - not the other way around. The same was true for most other religions. The clever addition of religion when implementing these practices is the carrot and stick approach provided by the promise of Heaven or the punishment of Hell.

You say in your second sentence that "Historically, these beliefs have been used to justify a lot of pretty bad behavior", could you please tell me what all this bad behaviour has been justified by christian beliefs as I'm honestly not sure what they are. I'm not interested in the ones that man made up and said it was the way of the bible. I want to know actual going ons that align with the bible.

It's genuinely quite astonishing that you are not aware of the multitude of awful acts that are either directly referenced in Christian Scripture, Interpreted from Christian Scripture or carried out in the name of Christianity.

Directly referenced:
- Timothy 2:12, in which the saint says: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent." - Sexism
- Samuel 15:3: "This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' - Genocide
- Psalm 137, "Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us / He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." - Infanticide
- Peter 2:18, "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel." - Slavery

The list of scriptural justification for some of the most horrific acts of humanity is extensive, probably worth a read if you think the bible is all sunshine and roses.

Acts conducted in the name of Christianity:
Rather than write an exhaustive list of the countless times Christianity is referenced as the justification for terrible acts, from the Crusades to the KKK and the Westboro Baptist Church, take a look here to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_violence
Not to mention multiple decrees from Popes over the ages that have had appalling consequences, including the proliferation of HIV and AIDS, particularly in Africa by discouraging condoms.

To me, religion in all its forms is an obvious man-made construct to control and influence the masses - sometimes with good intent, often times not. However, whilst it does unsettle me on a personal level that people would choose to believe this prescribed truth over their own moral and rational judgement, I do completely respect any individuals choice to hold these beliefs. What I do not respect, is the blind ignorance of those who fail to see the damage that can, has and will continue to be caused to society/individuals when the practice and preaching of some of these views lose touch with basic human compassion.

 

[smartcooky]

US has it right with the 1st Amendment

I wish people here would learn a thing or two before dropping catchphrases like "1st Amendment" without actually knowing what they are talking about.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is NOT, repeat NOT a universal, absolute right to free speech!! You are just one of many who mischaracterize the the Right to Free Speech as being the right to say what they like, when they like to whoever they like, without any consequences. This characterization is completely incorrect.

The First Amendment States: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What this means is that THE GOVERNMENT cannot make any Law that restricts your speech. It does not mean that, a club, a business, an organization, an internet platform or an employer cannot restrict what you are allowed to say. Freedom of speech is not absolute, and it does not imply freedom from consequences of that speech.

The great jurist Oliver Wendall Holmes (Associate US Supreme Court justice 1902 to 1932) in Schenck v. United States, wrote that no free speech safeguard would cover someone "falsely shouting fire in a theatre". While you might be free to shout fire in a theatre where there was no fire, you would also be held responsible for any damage, injury or death caused in the rush for patrons to get out of the theatre.

 

[del boy]

Sure, Here's South Africa's Hate Speech Bill which was approved last year:

http://www.justice.gov.za/legislation/hcbill/B9-2018-HateCrimesBill.pdf

We had a case recently in South Africa where a white woman, Penny Sparrow was convicted of hate speech, and has received a prison sentence of 5 years.

Thanks for the Link

I'll get back to you once I've a bit of time to read it in detail

 

[Derpus]

Your first sentence of this paragraph is what I don't like and I think you're right in that, this is what's happening. Christian beliefs are the core principals of the main laws we have today (e.g. do not murder, commit theft etc..) and we should never forget that. Folaus post wasn't directed only at homosexuals. It also mentioned cheaters, thieves and drunks.

You say in your second sentence that "Historically, these beliefs have been used to justify a lot of pretty bad behavior", could you please tell me what all this bad behaviour has been justified by christian beliefs as I'm honestly not sure what they are. I'm not interested in the ones that man made up and said it was the way of the bible. I want to know actual going ons that align with the bible.

Apart from that, I liked the way you wrote your post about what I already knew about Izzy and his contract.

To an extent this is true, but it's definitely a gross simplification. I would agree that on some level our society was historically founded on Christian beliefs (but also an amalgam of a wide range of other faiths and mysticisms). Whether that's good or bad is not certain.

Christianity gave us the dark ages - a near two thousand year long scientific stagnation. They literally killed or excommunicated anyone who asserted any proposition that wasn't in keeping with the bibles 'teaching'. Copernicus had the gall to suggest the earth wasn't the centre of the universe and so the catholic church ****** up his life. There is an extensive history of this kind of ****. They dabbled in slavery, suppression of women's rights, long and bloody crusades, the inquisition, etc. It's a long list.

Acknowledging that something is a part of our past does not mean that we shouldn't try to change or improve ourselves.

 

[All Black]

A number of your posts on this topic are quite misinformed.



Which country are you talking about here? In New Zealand (and pretty much all traditionally Christian nations that I am aware of) you do not have to swear on a religious text. Secondly, by focusing on this you are clearly missing the point. Smartcooky is trying to point out that your contention - that Christianity is the origin of moral guidance in society - is unfounded. This is because the same core values are present, not only in other (some of which are older) religious texts, but also in predominantly atheist societies. They are also written in to law and upheld by completely secular institutions in the vast majority of nations.

In other words: For the most part, the bible incorporated longstanding established practices that were already present in some form and seen as key to a functioning society into its text - not the other way around. The same was true for most other religions. The clever addition of religion when implementing these practices is the carrot and stick approach provided by the promise of Heaven or the punishment of Hell.



It's genuinely quite astonishing that you are not aware of the multitude of awful acts that are either directly referenced in Christian Scripture, Interpreted from Christian Scripture or carried out in the name of Christianity.

Directly referenced:
- Timothy 2:12, in which the saint says: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, she must be silent." - Sexism
- Samuel 15:3: "This is what the Lord Almighty says ... 'Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.' - Genocide
- Psalm 137, "Happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us / He who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks." - Infanticide
- Peter 2:18, "Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel." - Slavery

The list of scriptural justification for some of the most horrific acts of humanity is extensive, probably worth a read if you think the bible is all sunshine and roses.

Acts conducted in the name of Christianity:
Rather than write an exhaustive list of the countless times Christianity is referenced as the justification for terrible acts, from the Crusades to the KKK and the Westboro Baptist Church, take a look here to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_violence
Not to mention multiple decrees from Popes over the ages that have had appalling consequences, including the proliferation of HIV and AIDS, particularly in Africa by discouraging condoms.

To me, religion in all its forms is an obvious man-made construct to control and influence the masses - sometimes with good intent, often times not. However, whilst it does unsettle me on a personal level that people would choose to believe this prescribed truth over their own moral and rational judgement, I do completely respect any individuals choice to hold these beliefs. What I do not respect, is the blind ignorance of those who fail to see the damage that can, has and will continue to be caused to society/individuals when the practice and preaching of some of these views lose touch with basic human compassion.

I think Cooky can speak for himself.

Thanks for the rest of your post. I'll have to look at it later to put into context.

Fair post.

 

[Derpus]

When you go to court OF LAW, what BOOK do you put your hand on to swear oath? come on show me your intelligence. Is it the Quran?

"That will be all judge LOL".

You aren't required to swear on a bible, you just can. You can also swear on the Quran or a variety of other books. Or nothing.

In Australia, anyway.

 

[ncurd]

God this thread is becoming even more cringe inducing in multiple magnitudes as time goes on.

 

[All Black]

You aren't required to swear on a bible, you just can. You can also swear on the Quran or a variety of other books. Or nothing.

In Australia, anyway.

Yeah but it's mostly the bible for most courts. It would be weird to see the quran pulled out, you must admit that its not very often you see that. I honestly have never seen the quran pulled out by the courts to swear oath on. The crucifix is probably the most popular symbol in all of religion. Whether its worn by great leaders, seen in our courts, sports stars, its everywhere.

 

[All Black]

God this thread is becoming even more cringe inducing in multiple magnitudes as time goes on.

Just don't read it bro. Dont show any interest in it at all. You wont experience any cringe that way.

 

[Derpus]

Yeah but it's mostly the bible for most courts. The crucifix is probably the most popular symbol in all of religion. Whether its worn by great leaders, seen in our courts, sports stars, its everywhere.

Eh, i don't think that's right.

It might simply be the case that majority of the people who appear in Court are a christian of some kind so it's most common.

 

[ncurd]

Just don't read it bro. Dont show any interest in it at all. You wont experience any cringe that way.

Some people are making serious and interesting points, I just wish idiots spouting utter horseshit like you would stay out of it and people would stop engaging with you about them.

 

[del boy]

I wish people here would learn a thing or two before dropping catchphrases like "1st Amendment" without actually knowing what they are talking about.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is NOT, repeat NOT a universal, absolute right to free speech!! You are just one of many who mischaracterize the the Right to Free Speech as being the right to say what they like, when they like to whoever they like, without any consequences. This characterization is completely incorrect.

The First Amendment States: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What this means is that THE GOVERNMENT cannot make any Law that restricts your speech. It does not mean that, a club, a business, an organization, an internet platform or an employer cannot restrict what you are allowed to say. Freedom of speech is not absolute, and it does not imply freedom from consequences of that speech.

The great jurist Oliver Wendall Holmes (Associate US Supreme Court justice 1902 to 1932) in Schenck v. United States, wrote that no free speech safeguard would cover someone "falsely shouting fire in a theatre". While you might be free to shout fire in a theatre where there was no fire, you would also be held responsible for any damage, injury or death caused in the rush for patrons to get out of the theatre.

Cooky I'm well aware of the distinction of the 1A in it begin used to protect citizens from Government oversight to restrict your speech

which does NOT extend to private sphere/sector

I was talking about the general spirit of the 1A in that it allows for MORE Speech and Dialogue

Ideas can't be discussed if folks don't have the courage and belief to state in the place

Last time I checked this was a rugby forum, lets not go down the rabbit hole of Case Law Cannon Law and scriptures

BUT I congratulate you on your Wilful Misrepresentation of my last post

WELL DONE!!!!!

 

[All Black]

Eh, i don't think that's right.

It might simply be the case that majority of the people who appear in Court are a christian of some kind so it's most common.

Well look at it this way, have you honestly seen the quran pulled out in the court of law to swear oath on? Like honestly. Because I honestly haven't.

Anyway, christianity IMO has played a big part in shaping a lot of our laws.

 

[All Black]

Some people are making serious and interesting points, I just wish idiots spouting utter horseshit like you would stay out of it and people would stop engaging with you about them.

Oh I thought you were complaining about this thread LOL. Nice engaging with me LOL

 

[Derpus]

Well look at it this way, have you honestly seen the quran pulled out in the court of law to swear oath on? Like honestly. Because I honestly haven't.

Anyway, christianity IMO has played a big part in shaping a lot of our laws.

What's your point anyway?

Utter rubbish!

Muslims, Hindus, Jews & Buddhists have core principles in laws that forbid murder, theft etc. Are their laws based in Christianity?

I like the idea that the commonalities are a product of the social contract and not the divine.

 

[smartcooky]

In other words: For the most part, the bible incorporated longstanding established practices that were already present in some form and seen as key to a functioning society into its text - not the other way around. The same was true for most other religions. The clever addition of religion when implementing these practices is the carrot and stick approach provided by the promise of Heaven or the punishment of Hell.

THIS!

To me, religion in all its forms is an obvious man-made construct to control and influence the masses - sometimes with good intent, often times not. However, whilst it does unsettle me on a personal level that people would choose to believe this prescribed truth over their own moral and rational judgement, I do completely respect any individuals choice to hold these beliefs. What I do not respect, is the blind ignorance of those who fail to see the damage that can, has and will continue to be caused to society/individuals when the practice and preaching of some of these views lose touch with basic human compassion.

Nail on head

* * * * * * *

Just so that people are aware of my position on religion, so that there can be no doubt, my experience of religion is as follows.

I was indoctrinated into Christianity from an early age. I was sent to Sunday school by my parents, but at about 10 years old, I started asking really awkward questions (such as why I couldn't see heaven when I looked up to the night sky, and how could hell be below us when no-one has ever gone deeper than a couple of miles into the ground, and how did Jesus manage to walk on water when the surface tension would never have held his weight, and if God does love us all, how come he allows the poor to remain poor and for those he loves to die in car accidents, plane crashes, and floods, fires and earthquakes?) The Sunday school teacher asked my parents to stop sending me because I was being "disruptive). It was shortly afterwards that I realised that religion is nothing more than bunk designed to pull the wool over the eyes of anyone whom by that age had not stopped asking questions. My rational reasonable mind would no longer stand being told "because god made it that way" in answer to every question I asked. So I turned my back on religion fully and completely; and it did me no harm - I am now 63, and so far, I have led a mostly satisfying and happy life without the need to know why I am alive.

What I can tell you is this: the MESSAGE of The Bible is indeed valid; if the world really was a place without war and prejudice, bigotry and evil, greed and hunger etc, then it would be a wonderful place. However, the METHOD the bible uses to get that message across is completely wrong. Filling people's minds with dread and fear is not the way to instill righteousness. Look how many wars have been fought over which religion is the correct one? Faith in one god or another can get you killed depending on where on earth you happen to live, or even visit in the current climate.

It seems to me that its safer to have no faith at all except in your own ability to lead your life in a caring and responsible manner, achieving a peaceful existence by simply leading a decent and honourable life, and accepting those around you as your equals. I do all those things because I chose to do so, not because I think it will earn me better stead in the afterlife.

 

[All Black]

What's your point anyway?

Um whats my point?? I just asked you a simple question. Have you honestly seen a court of law pull out the quran to swear oath on? Thats it, it's a yes or a no. Not trying to make any point.

 

[big ginger 8]

To an extent this is true, but it's definitely a gross simplification. I would agree that on some level our society was historically founded on Christian beliefs (but also an amalgam of a wide range of other faiths and mysticisms). Whether that's good or bad is not certain.

Christianity gave us the dark ages - a near two thousand year long scientific stagnation. They literally killed or excommunicated anyone who asserted any proposition that wasn't in keeping with the bibles 'teaching'. Copernicus had the gall to suggest the earth wasn't the centre of the universe and so the catholic church ****** up his life. There is an extensive history of this kind of ****. They dabbled in slavery, suppression of women's rights, long and bloody crusades, the inquisition, etc. It's a long list.

Acknowledging that something is a part of our past does not mean that we shouldn't try to change or improve ourselves.

While the Church has definitely been at the centre of a number of wrongs committed over the last 2000 or so years the so called dark ages and particularly in the case of Copernicus weren't like they are in the popular imagination.

Copernicus had a doctorate in canon law and dedicated his book to the pope. His findings were even taught at major Catholic Universities, the tune was definitely changed by the time of Galileo largely due to the rise of fundamentalist Protestantism and Galileo being a bit of a dick.

The Dark Ages are so called because very few of their writings survived to the modern day. One of the reasons we actually have any writings is because they were transcribed by monks. The Catholic Church was pretty much the only source of scholarship or education in medieval Europe (which of course does have it's own problems) and they were also one of the biggest patrons during the Renaissance. There has always been problems with fundamentalism in the Church from when it became the religion of the Roman Empire but a lot of the more fundamental aspects didn't come about until later then you'd think. For example celibacy didn't become a requirement for those in religious orders until the 1100s.

 

[big ginger 8]

Um whats my point?? I just asked you a simple question. Have you honestly seen a court of law pull out the quran to swear oath on? Thats it, it's a yes or a no. Not trying to make any point.

I personally have and I have also seen atheists being sworn in without a bible.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1927/act/23/section/53/enacted/en/html

The 1927 Juries Act which was made in ultra Catholic Ireland even then made allowances for non-Christians being sworn in with their own religious text.