I laughed when she said “we have a freedom of expression, but not a freedom to offend”. That is so contradictory, without counting the fact that offence is a subjective matter, while freedom itself is objective. Australia is extremely flawed when it comes to freedoms. Freedoms such as speech should not be ‘granted’, rather, they should be upheld. Maybe my home Australia will change, soon.
Exactly. The rules aren’t even clear either. What if the police and judges decide to enforce any phrase that could be taken as an insult? I could see this easily including a lot of political speech.
@Aussie Pom How do we know, that they're not doing that, just now..!? We all know that, "they'll only tell us, what they only want us to know"..!! As it is, they're making their own rules up, as they go. And "apparently" we already have rules in place for us..!! And yes, ppl r gunna ask/say how, why & when etc.. etc.. The Government r so Corrupt..!! It wouldn't surprise me. Nothing would, when it comes to the Government..!!
I hope young people such as my generation change that as we grow into society. No longer should the government be able to oppress peoples’ liberties under the ambiguous guise of stopping “offense”. No man should tell another what he can think and say in a free land, any government saying otherwise is at least partially tyrannical from my American perspective.
I have never given anyone permission to curtail my freedom of speech. Megalomaniac governments can inflict violence upon me for speaking but my right to speak is innate.. It exists regardless of some statute bullshit that some stranger writes. A far greater crime than speaking is the countless acts of intimidation and violence that the corporate "government" perpetrates continuously.
If you're alleged right existed under CC then it would require your permission to bring about the abridgement of that freedom ie. Amendment under 128. There is no right, expressed or implied
you have the freedom to state your mind or express your opinion so long as when you do so you do not cause me some harm which is based on an untruth. If you do then I can apply to the Courts to recover damages from you. I you maliciously invent an accusation against me and someone decides to do me physical harm then under statute law (the Crimes Act) you could be charged with incitement to cause violence. Under the Australian system you have responsibilities. you have freedoms when you exercise those freedoms responsibly
Then I suggest that the people of Australia make a Bill of Rights. Australia is still the only country without a Bill of Rights, and that needs to change.
We actually do, this speaker was chosen for her ability to lie and keep a straight face. I never understood why we sang God Save The Queen in school. But now I know.
We are a lot better off than some countries who have a "freedom of speech" right - the great USA being one, now the United Kingdom with "so called "Hate Sprech"
Freedom of speech is to say whatever u want, when u want, how u want, wherever u want! If there are restrictions then it isn’t freedom of speech. Simple!
Speech isn't just sound that comes out of your mouth, it is better expressed as 'thought'. Freedom of speech doesn't permit threats and intimidation or libel, its meant to be a principle that protects your ability to express your thoughts, creatively, politically and religiously.
@YASHARALAH KONNICHIWA ARIGATO Yes, as a principle. Australia doesn't accept freedom of thought and expression as a right though. People have a right not to be offended here and 'offensive' art can be an offense. Here the argument is free speech just means the public and press can debate policy freely without the threat of sedition charges, its based on need and utility. Even if we did have the right there are always limitations, you can say pretty much anything in the US at anytime but not anywhere. Like people can't walk around in public spaces with pornographic material printed on their shirts. Its usually pretty reasonable.
You have to have some sort of boundary. Back in the day your freedom of speech was limited by your ability to avoid a broken nose, you could express your honest opinion about the big bloke sitting at the bar, and they were free to sit you on your bum. Apparently thats not allowed anymore so you’re free to abuse anyone you like? You should be free to express your views on anything you like, but you should be ready to receive your listeners views in return. Getting upset and demanding everyone think like you is not free speech, abusing people and trying to get them sacked is not free speech, its just abuse. Commercial art and media should stand on its own merits without a crowd of protesters forcing their opinion’s on everyone, if it sells great, otherwise try again. The bottom line is you should be free to voice your opinion but you should take responsibility for its consequences. If your rhetoric leads to deaths and or a crime spree than its off to gaol for you. If you get a broken nose then you might want to think before opening your mouth a second time.
Offense is harmless and, ergo, not criminal. Criminalising offense is tantamount to criminalising the tides. That said, there's a reason why it's bad form to use ones real name in online video games. Perhaps we should declare it bad form to use one's real name in any online setting.
How can an Australian Comedian make. a living if its freedom of expression but not a freedom to offend ? People can choose to get offended over anything....
3:30 “we have a freedom of expression, but not a freedom to offend”. A contrary set of statements. All expression can be deemed offensive because offence is subjective, so the two statements are oxymoronic. One of the classic, but fast dying, qualities of Australian larrikinism is for two mates to insult each other, to test if or when they will flinch. It's a matter of pride not to react.
Democratic country have Bill of Rights, why is Australia only country with out a Bill of Rights why is that, new Zealand has a Bill of Rights to protect their citizens against government abuse and neglect of freedom and privacy from the government its not just amercia not only. That the Bill of. Rights should protect Aussies from joining the world so if war happens Volentueer service could be forced on Aussies!!!!
A person's freedom to speak is a birthright the day we are born and NO govt has the ability to restrict your or my freedom of speech ! I do not need ANYONE,S consent to speak in any given instance period !!
What is moral is always above the law. Because it's legal doesn't necessarily make it right. I'm free to say as I please as long as it is factually correct. If it offends somebody then that is their problem and I couldn't give a fuck. I have never ceded to any body the right to sovereignty of my being.
Freedom of Speech or NOTHING, hate speech does not exist. Incitement to violence should be the ONLY restriction of freedom of speech, because that's when words suddenly become meaningless.
torts for demonstrable damages as a result of speech should also be allowed. For instance if you intentionally lie about a product that I sell and I can prove that lie resulted in damages to my brand or the sales of the product, you should be liable to cover those damages. This is where liable and slander comes in.
It helps to be in a position of power to say what you want. I had worked at a school run by Sisters of Mercy nuns. A cover up needed to take place so to discredit me the school leaders placed a written false report about me in my file. I told other staff the true story and was sacked for speaking. My union said the boss has the right to sack me for bringing them into disrepute even if I spoke the truth, had a need to speak and the truth is not in dispute. Also this video owner has the power to silence my freedom of speech with a click of the button. I have also noticed that when my youtube comments get deleted the comment is still there if I are logged in but I are the only person who can see the comment. I will write a comment that I make, which gets deleted all the time. I will click out of this comment and if you don't see a comment about Thomas Hamilton (Dunblane) you will know my next comment was deleted. Also my story about what happened at the school is too long for here but if people wished to read google innuendo test blog and google white lies test blog.
High court implied right has been up held. Lets not forget Kirby's ' some commonlaw rights are so deeply imbedded that parliament may not over ride.' A bill of rights is less secure because it is merely another act of parliament and can be manipulated for political ends.
A lot is written about the damage done to children who were abused. But the damage done to those falsely accused can be just as devastating. Thomas Hamilton (Dunblane) had his life made miserable by people calling him a pedophile and pervert. He hit out by shooting 16 children and the teacher dead. I are yet to read about a single child or parent to come forward to directly accuse Hamilton of even a minor sexual offence so it seems to me he was falsely accused. It might be just a matter of time before an innocent man gets falsely accused and explodes like Hamilton did.
We were transferred as cattle under the states from the UK, with a dash of federalism It was all about the management.. We have not fought for freedom against tyranny as a people. Creation of a two tiered society could be the start of a revolution. By unification of diverse groups who have a common tyrannical enemy, there will be sufficient numbers for at least a political reversal of overrreach.
Yes, just like under any totalitarian regime(and many absolute monarchies throughout history),people were free to say what they liked, and just had to face the consequences. So we in fact don't have a right to freedom of speech.
In Australia we are FORCED to vote for either Labor or Liberal, yes forced, if we vote for somebody else we still have to vote either Labor or Liberal. Think about that. Most things I care about are bipartisan. That means it doesn't matter who you vote for you vote for the same lizards.
@Aussie Pom you still have to register to vote. Such a hassle. Politics is a lie… it doesn’t change a thing honestly, they are the same party no matter if labour or lib wins… so. I’m happy not voting. And not paying my fine either. What are they going to do? I don’t have a license they can suspend.
@@milkglassfairy7641 No. You don't have to vote. You have to get your name crossed off by post or by attending a polling place. But you don't have to vote. You may as well vote once you're there - even if it's just for the joke parties.
The law in Australia doesn't provide for free speech, but it can and does restrict what the people who created it are allowed to say, hear, read, think and do (No different to Pol Pot or Kim jong un really?). Australians fought and died defending this country from fascism, communism and currently religious fanaticism. They stopped and are still trying to stop any attempts at controlling our rights and freedom including we are allowed to say and think. So I also get "offended" when I hear people so blithely sacrificing what few rights we have left as if it's nothing, and not being able to do a thing about it, except at election time. Unfortunately, the big three all support replacing what little Australian culture there is with multiculturalism (or a type of Disneyland multiculturalism with all the costumes and none of the bad bits like ethnic and religious violence that these same people supposedly escaped from and left behind to start a new life in Australia. If I want to see another culture I can visit unless it's unsafe and they might kill me in the name of their religion because of what I look like (i.e. white Australian male, an endangered minority like the rhino in a world context). My right to swing a fist ends where the other persons nose begins. It shouldn't extend to someone being arrested and imprisoned just because they've hurt someone else's feelings by what they say, if they genuinely believe it). It's called being an adult. Otherwise both parties end up being offended, and then who is right? Is it fair one side should be legally gagged and intimidated for having genuine concerns about an issue. This is unjust and quite reasonably causes resentment and frustration and if not addressed goes underground and festers, which is literally just hiding the problem. So yeah let's have free speech, We deserve it.
Spot on. We are born with a right to freedom (speech, movement etc) and we must not surrender it. BTW do people know how many Australians got to vote for the constitution 1900?Look it up, you might be unpleasantly surprised.
Sadly does not count as international law as we know it more or less happened after WWII. So all events before that are not going to be looked at through modern interpretations of international law.
Great video! There should be more information like this on all subjects.. Why not educate women and men on DV. Education rather than incarceration. Costs the taxpayers hugely. Even having to list to BS government adds should be outlawed.
You should all learn the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. Those are our true laws and it's written in plain English for everyone to understand because they are OUR LAWS. If you don't learn them they cannot protect you.
No we don't. We are completely reliant on Article 19 of the UN. That is a sad indictment that we don't stand for freedom of speech and opinion, a cornerstone of democracy.
How does the law see Reappropriation Vocabulary. Such as, the cultural process by which a group reclaims words. Aka cultural context of the use of the N-word amongst African Americans within their own communities?
Constitution? What is this constitution you speak of? On numerous occasions, when pressing (formerly Commonwealth) 'Public Servants' about Constitutional rights I've been told "the Constitution is no longer relevant" apparently after duping Elizabeth R into giving assent to the Whitlam Government's treasonous act of Defacing of the Great Seal of the Commonwealth then with Royal assent, replaced with New Great Seal of Australia proclaiming the Queen of Australia without due process by way of the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 plus the Australia Act 1986 rid us of boring old 'The Commonwealth of Australia' title giving us the likes of 'Australian Government'. All done without a Referendum vote by all eligible citizens
"The constitution is no longer relevant?" Unless Australia gets invaded by another country, the constitution will always be relevant. Imagine trying to take away an American's gun and just saying "Well yes, the 2nd amendment, sure, but the constitution was *years* ago and it's super out-dated. so its no longer relevant", they probably get their gun out right there and then xD
Who determines what these bounds of freedom of speech should be. It is fairly obvious that Silicon Valley has taken on that role on their associated platforms BUT is that their role?
"Free speech" implies some other person could hold a right to shut us up. "Australian law" is not equal to ethical rights of all. Of course we ALL hold a fundamental right of saying what we like. How could we not? Government and institutional law is NOT the arbiter of ethics, truth, and justice. God is.
Whilst I agree that Australia needs a Bill of Rights, I disagree that we need it 'now'. Our parliament is currently infested with virtue signaling far-left ideologues. Can you imagine what would end up in it?
Being "offended" is not an ethical reason to argue for imposition on the fundamental right to speak freely. "Harm" on others from words is frivolous nonsense.
So what about scotty from marketing's unconstitutional nation cabinet (read star chamber) after he suspended parliament Australia being one of the few countries to allow that to happen????That is why all the con virus rules have been expressed as rules and not law as they where not legislated through a sitting parliament and passed as laws.The use of the emergency health act is so fraught with holes it makes Swiss cheese look whole .
Any law passed by our government that breaches the following articles is a breach of our unalienable human rights. Article 18 Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance. Article 19 Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 20 Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. No one may be compelled to belong to an association. So..anyone arrested or penalised in any way by ANY law enacted by our government that contradicts or opposes ANY of the above articles, (which coincidentally would be passed under maritime law, which is being fraudulently administered on the land) would have the right to file a lawsuit for damages against those enforcing it and those that enacted the respective law/s.
As started in the video, these stipulations in the ICCPR are only guidelines and unless Australia implements them into our own domestic law, they hold no legal binding and therefore cannot be enforced by Australian courts.
We did have but they sneeked that out so we cant We are over goverened over taxed average australians are frightened to make a stand and argue their case
A lot of people get falsely accused of sexual offences against children. Informers have the right to say what they like and stay anonymous and the accused is not even allowed to know what was said. About 1990 a sexual offender was active who abducted young girls and when he finished with them, he released them. But Karmein Chan was not released but murdered. The police and media called on the public to nominate a suspect. 27,000 men were named. Of these 73 were charged with an offence (not connected to the murder) 73 in 27,000 is about 1/4 of 1% so that suggests how easy it is to get falsely accused or suspected. (That was just a background as to why I make the next comment that keeps getting deleted)
@Aussie Pom The situation you just mentioned, at least those involved were told what they had alegded to have done. In my case I was not even allowed to know what was said about me. The police contacted the school where I had worked to ask questions. The media had been telling what a great job the police were doing by uncovering nests of pedophiles. I think that a pedophile witch hunt is taking place and even being friendly to a child is enough to get accused of being a pedophile.
Australian freedom doesn't exist. Even if you aren't poor and can pay the freedom taxes ( for smoking, drinking and permits for camping like activities like sites, fires, singing fishing and hunting etc.) can you call it freedom if you can't order a beer after 11 pm? I laughed at the movie the demolition man back in the day believing that level of control with never exist. boy am I surprised now.
Australians do have a right to freedom of speech and that is why so few of them vote in 2024. However, there are people who are unsure about Australian vaccine manufacturers.
Australia is a overseas military outpost. A countrie that submit to the more powerfull, defacto surrenders the rights of its citizens, and put above, the geopolitical needs of the power to which it has become subservient. Turn it that way, or turn it the other way to.suit the discourse, but as they say in Africa: " the lion has no friends".
I feel like Australian culture should and looks a lot like America, so kind of shocking that Australia just doesn’t give a fuck, especially because they easily have one of the best election systems in the world
You can say whatever you want in China and Russia too, but there are repercussions. Just like there are in Australia. A perfect example is if you do not toe the leftist line. Don't mention the 'taking the knee' business the AFL players were forced to undertake. If you didn't you were shamed and banned.
Law? - we cannot be ethically subject to arbitrary "statute" rules masquerading as "law" WHEN they disregard and subjugate the ethical right of the individual under God's Law alone. This has nothing to with religion and is about true and just jurisdiction.
Pretty pathetic for a legal video to refer to a landmark free speech case in the High Court of the Commonwealth of Australia and show the coat of arms of NZ and the ABC logo when the case was brought by Australian Capital Television not the ABC.
I believe that free speech should be sacrosanct but you should never personalise. You can have absolutely no respect for people’s opinions but you should never rude to the person. I believe you can be savagely rude about what the person thinks. That seems to me a crucial distinction: people must be protected from discrimination by virtue of their race, but you cannot ring-fence their ideas. The moment you say that any idea system is sacred, whether it’s a religious belief system or a secular ideology, the moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible. What we have here in Australia is damn stupid. Protecting people from being offended is just pandering to those who have something to be offended about.
I thought that the UN charter which Australia is a signatory gives, us Australians the right to free/freedom of speech! Correct me if I am wrong please. Please cut to the chase too much word salad, don't compare USA to Australia.
Okay let's give this university content a whirl, surely can't be too bad ...one sentence in and you're already fuckin wrong. Okay so this was freedom of speech on a legal, big picture stage, but what about on a social and day to day occurrence? Didn't think a uni would wanna hint as to why they might be wrong on fuckin everything
"Australia is a democratic country"; Wrong. Democracy ended with universal suffrage and that's a good thing because universal suffrage is far more inclusive then democracy. "Most Australians grow up thinking they have a right..."; uhm, speaking for myself, no. I was warned by my parents that "rights" are a furphy or red herring or pink elephant. Offensive language laws specifically target words of Germanic or class origin with sexual or scatological connotations and those laws, themselves, exemplify a hate crime. At face value, the 'right' to 'freedom of speech' encompasses the right to slander, commit fraud + commit perjury. "Freedom of speech" isn't all pretty flowers and fluffy bunnies. We need a more explicit term because the current "freedom of speech" phrase just doesn't say it.
What makes Australia a democracy? We started out as convicts and our laws were not democratic then and i do not see any change that has altered that situation. We do not have lots of votes on lots of issues, where the majority gets what they want. Neither are our elections first across the line, majority wins. I do not think we are a democracy, sorry. Maybe you can convibce me.
Such lefty propaganda. There are discussions for and against human rights acts and so on, but this came across as a propaganda piece for one side. And, by the way, despite how much you want this to be the case, international law 'does not technically apply to Australian law.' In fact, 'international law' does not apply to Australian law - at all. There is nothing technical about it.
yeh but that is okay if I have no rights as an Australian ... I'm an Aussie we accept anything from the government as long as it's for our health and safety..
I laughed when she said “we have a freedom of expression, but not a freedom to offend”. That is so contradictory, without counting the fact that offence is a subjective matter, while freedom itself is objective. Australia is extremely flawed when it comes to freedoms. Freedoms such as speech should not be ‘granted’, rather, they should be upheld.
Maybe my home Australia will change, soon.
Exactly. The rules aren’t even clear either. What if the police and judges decide to enforce any phrase that could be taken as an insult? I could see this easily including a lot of political speech.
@Aussie Pom
How do we know, that they're not doing that, just now..!? We all know that, "they'll only tell us, what they only want us to know"..!! As it is, they're making their own rules up, as they go. And "apparently" we already have rules in place for us..!!
And yes, ppl r gunna ask/say how, why & when etc.. etc..
The Government r so Corrupt..!! It wouldn't surprise me. Nothing would, when it comes to the Government..!!
Sounds like doublethink.
Never
I hope young people such as my generation change that as we grow into society. No longer should the government be able to oppress peoples’ liberties under the ambiguous guise of stopping “offense”. No man should tell another what he can think and say in a free land, any government saying otherwise is at least partially tyrannical from my American perspective.
Australia really needs a BILL OF RIGHTS!
I have never given anyone permission to curtail my freedom of speech. Megalomaniac governments can inflict violence upon me for speaking but my right to speak is innate.. It exists regardless of some statute bullshit that some stranger writes. A far greater crime than speaking is the countless acts of intimidation and violence that the corporate "government" perpetrates continuously.
💯
Especially now
If you're alleged right existed under CC then it would require your permission to bring about the abridgement of that freedom ie. Amendment under 128. There is no right, expressed or implied
you have the freedom to state your mind or express your opinion so long as when you do so you do not cause me some harm which is based on an untruth. If you do then I can apply to the Courts to recover damages from you. I you maliciously invent an accusation against me and someone decides to do me physical harm then under statute law (the Crimes Act) you could be charged with incitement to cause violence. Under the Australian system you have responsibilities. you have freedoms when you exercise those freedoms responsibly
Then I suggest that the people of Australia make a Bill of Rights. Australia is still the only country without a Bill of Rights, and that needs to change.
Shocking. Australia needs a BILL OF RIGHTS NOW!!
We actually do, this speaker was chosen for her ability to lie and keep a straight face. I never understood why we sang God Save The Queen in school. But now I know.
Sad, very sad. I wonder how many people realise how stifled we are. And the worse thing is when people self-censor themselves.
We are a lot better off than some countries who have a "freedom of speech" right - the great USA being one, now the United Kingdom with "so called "Hate Sprech"
Freedom of speech is to say whatever u want, when u want, how u want, wherever u want! If there are restrictions then it isn’t freedom of speech. Simple!
Speech isn't just sound that comes out of your mouth, it is better expressed as 'thought'. Freedom of speech doesn't permit threats and intimidation or libel, its meant to be a principle that protects your ability to express your thoughts, creatively, politically and religiously.
@YASHARALAH KONNICHIWA ARIGATO Yes, as a principle. Australia doesn't accept freedom of thought and expression as a right though. People have a right not to be offended here and 'offensive' art can be an offense. Here the argument is free speech just means the public and press can debate policy freely without the threat of sedition charges, its based on need and utility.
Even if we did have the right there are always limitations, you can say pretty much anything in the US at anytime but not anywhere. Like people can't walk around in public spaces with pornographic material printed on their shirts. Its usually pretty reasonable.
You can say whatever you want as long as it's not on the prohibited list or anything else that those who rule you don't like.
You have to have some sort of boundary. Back in the day your freedom of speech was limited by your ability to avoid a broken nose, you could express your honest opinion about the big bloke sitting at the bar, and they were free to sit you on your bum. Apparently thats not allowed anymore so you’re free to abuse anyone you like?
You should be free to express your views on anything you like, but you should be ready to receive your listeners views in return. Getting upset and demanding everyone think like you is not free speech, abusing people and trying to get them sacked is not free speech, its just abuse. Commercial art and media should stand on its own merits without a crowd of protesters forcing their opinion’s on everyone, if it sells great, otherwise try again.
The bottom line is you should be free to voice your opinion but you should take responsibility for its consequences. If your rhetoric leads to deaths and or a crime spree than its off to gaol for you. If you get a broken nose then you might want to think before opening your mouth a second time.
What is the Law Society Of N.SW. doing to introduce new Freedom Of Speech legislation in Australian law?
“we have a freedom of expression, but not a freedom to offend”.
Great for professional victims who love to take offence to everything!
Offense is harmless and, ergo, not criminal. Criminalising offense is tantamount to criminalising the tides. That said, there's a reason why it's bad form to use ones real name in online video games. Perhaps we should declare it bad form to use one's real name in any online setting.
They can still find you through your ip address and stuff@@Mercurio-Morat-Goes-Bughunting
This hurts to watch.
this is what causes dictatorships.
How can an Australian Comedian make. a living if its freedom of expression but not a freedom to offend ? People can choose to get offended over anything....
I served in the army to defend my right to an opinion
Depending on the war you fought in it was just to support US imperialism and supporting the weapons industry
@@pastorofmuppets8834my grandpa fought in Korea against commie scum
3:30 “we have a freedom of expression, but not a freedom to offend”.
A contrary set of statements. All expression can be deemed offensive because offence is subjective, so the two statements are oxymoronic.
One of the classic, but fast dying, qualities of Australian larrikinism is for two mates to insult each other, to test if or when they will flinch. It's a matter of pride not to react.
There is never balance it is who has the POWER to say what where and when.
Arsetralia has never been the clever country
It’s all good until the police start enforcing the insult law more harshly
I'd rather not have their discretion on what I say.
@sandponics shut up nerd
Democratic country have Bill of Rights, why is Australia only country with out a Bill of Rights why is that, new Zealand has a Bill of Rights to protect their citizens against government abuse and neglect of freedom and privacy from the government its not just amercia not only. That the Bill of. Rights should protect Aussies from joining the world so if war happens Volentueer service could be forced on Aussies!!!!
A person's freedom to speak is a birthright the day we are born and NO govt has the ability to restrict your or my freedom of speech ! I do not need ANYONE,S consent to speak in any given instance period !!
Fun fact-If you’re right to Free Speech is at the mercy of the government. It’s a privilege, not a right.
Revocable.
Taking offense is ALWAYS a choice. There’s always the option to ignore.
What is moral is always above the law. Because it's legal doesn't necessarily make it right. I'm free to say as I please as long as it is factually correct. If it offends somebody then that is their problem and I couldn't give a fuck. I have never ceded to any body the right to sovereignty of my being.
Factually correct??are you 100 💯 sure? And if it's not it should not stop you because people should evaluate anything and everything!
I've been saying this for years, finally something that doesn't require me to point people in the direction of paperwork to show them.
Freedom of Speech or NOTHING, hate speech does not exist. Incitement to violence should be the ONLY restriction of freedom of speech, because that's when words suddenly become meaningless.
torts for demonstrable damages as a result of speech should also be allowed. For instance if you intentionally lie about a product that I sell and I can prove that lie resulted in damages to my brand or the sales of the product, you should be liable to cover those damages. This is where liable and slander comes in.
@Rusty Shackleford The U.S is run by Cronies Capitalists, wish it weren't true but it is. I bet the same problems are in other countries too.
I rely on the old school yard sayings of the 1950's "sticks and stones may break my bones BUT words will never hurt me".
Right or no right, one can always speak freely.
HA HA HA
We are not slaves, take your rights dont ask for them..
We need a bill of rights.
The U.S. has a Bill of Rights which is routinely ignored whenever it is convenient to do so for the tin-pot dictatorship over there.
Australia has an act not a bill of rights which means the govoment can change the act,as the govoment has done.?
Which Constitution are you referring to? Constitution 1900? Or the Australia Act 1986 corporate constitution?
Thank you, this was highly informative and very scary.
It helps to be in a position of power to say what you want. I had worked at a school run by Sisters of Mercy nuns. A cover up needed to take place so to discredit me the school leaders placed a written false report about me in my file. I told other staff the true story and was sacked for speaking. My union said the boss has the right to sack me for bringing them into disrepute even if I spoke the truth, had a need to speak and the truth is not in dispute. Also this video owner has the power to silence my freedom of speech with a click of the button. I have also noticed that when my youtube comments get deleted the comment is still there if I are logged in but I are the only person who can see the comment. I will write a comment that I make, which gets deleted all the time. I will click out of this comment and if you don't see a comment about Thomas Hamilton (Dunblane) you will know my next comment was deleted. Also my story about what happened at the school is too long for here but if people wished to read google innuendo test blog and google white lies test blog.
I think you mean the "Sisters of No Mercy". (I used to work for them)
High court implied right has been up held. Lets not forget Kirby's ' some commonlaw rights are so deeply imbedded that parliament may not over ride.' A bill of rights is less secure because it is merely another act of parliament and can be manipulated for political ends.
A lot is written about the damage done to children who were abused. But the damage done to those falsely accused can be just as devastating. Thomas Hamilton (Dunblane) had his life made miserable by people calling him a pedophile and pervert. He hit out by shooting 16 children and the teacher dead. I are yet to read about a single child or parent to come forward to directly accuse Hamilton of even a minor sexual offence so it seems to me he was falsely accused. It might be just a matter of time before an innocent man gets falsely accused and explodes like Hamilton did.
article 19 of the international law freedom of expression=the law no bad language.
We were transferred as cattle under the states from the UK, with a dash of federalism
It was all about the management..
We have not fought for freedom against tyranny as a people. Creation of a two tiered society could be the start of a revolution. By unification of diverse groups who have a common tyrannical enemy, there will be sufficient numbers for at least a political reversal of overrreach.
Yes we do, provided we are willing to face the consequences.
If consequences are imposed for exercising a 'right' then it is not being respected as a right.
Yes, just like under any totalitarian regime(and many absolute monarchies throughout history),people were free to say what they liked, and just had to face the consequences.
So we in fact don't have a right to freedom of speech.
In Australia we are FORCED to vote for either Labor or Liberal, yes forced, if we vote for somebody else we still have to vote either Labor or Liberal. Think about that. Most things I care about are bipartisan. That means it doesn't matter who you vote for you vote for the same lizards.
That’s what I hate about modern day political systems
We’re forced to VOTE. Full stop. Or face a fine. We don’t even have the right to say no I don’t want to vote… without getting fined… why?
@Aussie Pom you still have to register to vote. Such a hassle. Politics is a lie… it doesn’t change a thing honestly, they are the same party no matter if labour or lib wins… so. I’m happy not voting. And not paying my fine either. What are they going to do? I don’t have a license they can suspend.
@@milkglassfairy7641 No. You don't have to vote. You have to get your name crossed off by post or by attending a polling place. But you don't have to vote.
You may as well vote once you're there - even if it's just for the joke parties.
Lib/Labor coalition is what it really is with the full backing of the media.
We have rights under the Commonwealth Constitution.
which rights?
Even post-Whitlam?
bro my school made me pull up to this shit where are the RDR2 references???
bad school
Well, this was telling. Censorship laws beings passed right now in 2024.
Great video! Can we have one on Freedom of movement or assembly?
This just became a whole lot more relevant
The law in Australia doesn't provide for free speech, but it can and does restrict what the people who created it are allowed to say, hear, read, think and do (No different to Pol Pot or Kim jong un really?). Australians fought and died defending this country from fascism, communism and currently religious fanaticism. They stopped and are still trying to stop any attempts at controlling our rights and freedom including we are allowed to say and think. So I also get "offended" when I hear people so blithely sacrificing what few rights we have left as if it's nothing, and not being able to do a thing about it, except at election time. Unfortunately, the big three all support replacing what little Australian culture there is with multiculturalism (or a type of Disneyland multiculturalism with all the costumes and none of the bad bits like ethnic and religious violence that these same people supposedly escaped from and left behind to start a new life in Australia. If I want to see another culture I can visit unless it's unsafe and they might kill me in the name of their religion because of what I look like (i.e. white Australian male, an endangered minority like the rhino in a world context). My right to swing a fist ends where the other persons nose begins. It shouldn't extend to someone being arrested and imprisoned just because they've hurt someone else's feelings by what they say, if they genuinely believe it). It's called being an adult. Otherwise both parties end up being offended, and then who is right? Is it fair one side should be legally gagged and intimidated for having genuine concerns about an issue. This is unjust and quite reasonably causes resentment and frustration and if not addressed goes underground and festers, which is literally just hiding the problem. So yeah let's have free speech, We deserve it.
Spot on. We are born with a right to freedom (speech, movement etc) and we must not surrender it. BTW do people know how many Australians got to vote for the constitution 1900?Look it up, you might be unpleasantly surprised.
Under international law. The British invaded Australia, so the Australian government is breaking the law making laws.
Sadly does not count as international law as we know it more or less happened after WWII. So all events before that are not going to be looked at through modern interpretations of international law.
You could say that against any country :/
What Britain did in Australia is a non-issue in comparison to what they did when they invaded Ireland.
Australia needs a Freedom of Speech and a Human Rights Bill full-stop
We don't need any pieces of paper to say X, we're Australians and we are free, any move from the government to try and stop this is unaustralian.
In my opinion,Australia has one of most pathetic government and laws system iv seen.
Great video! There should be more information like this on all subjects.. Why not educate women and men on DV. Education rather than incarceration. Costs the taxpayers hugely. Even having to list to BS government adds should be outlawed.
You should all learn the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. Those are our true laws and it's written in plain English for everyone to understand because they are OUR LAWS. If you don't learn them they cannot protect you.
Nothing in the Constitution about individual rights
No we don't. We are completely reliant on Article 19 of the UN. That is a sad indictment that we don't stand for freedom of speech and opinion, a cornerstone of democracy.
Australia is so embarrassing
How does the law see Reappropriation Vocabulary. Such as, the cultural process by which a group reclaims words. Aka cultural context of the use of the N-word amongst African Americans within their own communities?
Constitution? What is this constitution you speak of? On numerous occasions, when pressing (formerly Commonwealth) 'Public Servants' about Constitutional rights I've been told "the Constitution is no longer relevant" apparently after duping Elizabeth R into giving assent to the Whitlam Government's treasonous act of Defacing of the Great Seal of the Commonwealth then with Royal assent, replaced with New Great Seal of Australia proclaiming the Queen of Australia without due process by way of the Royal Style and Titles Act 1973 plus the Australia Act 1986 rid us of boring old 'The Commonwealth of Australia' title giving us the likes of 'Australian Government'. All done without a Referendum vote by all eligible citizens
"The constitution is no longer relevant?" Unless Australia gets invaded by another country, the constitution will always be relevant. Imagine trying to take away an American's gun and just saying "Well yes, the 2nd amendment, sure, but the constitution was *years* ago and it's super out-dated. so its no longer relevant", they probably get their gun out right there and then xD
Who determines what these bounds of freedom of speech should be. It is fairly obvious that Silicon Valley has taken on that role on their associated platforms BUT is that their role?
No we don't and never had that freedom.
thanks for up load
No you do not have freedom of expression if that expression is subjectively determined to be wrong or right by another person or entity lady.
What happend if you offend someone? They bring you to court?
If the NAHFKU NAHFKU argument is in the Entogmogga pub, no ones gonna know..😮😊😅
"Free speech" implies some other person could hold a right to shut us up. "Australian law" is not equal to ethical rights of all. Of course we ALL hold a fundamental right of saying what we like. How could we not? Government and institutional law is NOT the arbiter of ethics, truth, and justice. God is.
Whilst I agree that Australia needs a Bill of Rights, I disagree that we need it 'now'.
Our parliament is currently infested with virtue signaling far-left ideologues. Can you imagine what would end up in it?
True 😳
Being "offended" is not an ethical reason to argue for imposition on the fundamental right to speak freely. "Harm" on others from words is frivolous nonsense.
So what about scotty from marketing's unconstitutional nation cabinet (read star chamber) after he suspended parliament Australia being one of the few countries to allow that to happen????That is why all the con virus rules have been expressed as rules and not law as they where not legislated through a sitting parliament and passed as laws.The use of the emergency health act is so fraught with holes it makes Swiss cheese look whole .
Any law passed by our government that breaches the following articles is a breach of our unalienable human rights.
Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 20
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
So..anyone arrested or penalised in any way by ANY law enacted by our government that contradicts or opposes ANY of the above articles, (which coincidentally would be passed under maritime law, which is being fraudulently administered on the land) would have the right to file a lawsuit for damages against those enforcing it and those that enacted the respective law/s.
As started in the video, these stipulations in the ICCPR are only guidelines and unless Australia implements them into our own domestic law, they hold no legal binding and therefore cannot be enforced by Australian courts.
We did have but they sneeked that out so we cant
We are over goverened over taxed average australians are frightened to make a stand and argue their case
A lot of people get falsely accused of sexual offences against children. Informers have the right to say what they like and stay anonymous and the accused is not even allowed to know what was said. About 1990 a sexual offender was active who abducted young girls and when he finished with them, he released them. But Karmein Chan was not released but murdered. The police and media called on the public to nominate a suspect. 27,000 men were named. Of these 73 were charged with an offence (not connected to the murder) 73 in 27,000 is about 1/4 of 1% so that suggests how easy it is to get falsely accused or suspected. (That was just a background as to why I make the next comment that keeps getting deleted)
that’s why civil law exists for suing people who slander or libel your name. That’s not an excuse for not having the freedom of speech.
@Aussie Pom The situation you just mentioned, at least those involved were told what they had alegded to have done. In my case I was not even allowed to know what was said about me. The police contacted the school where I had worked to ask questions. The media had been telling what a great job the police were doing by uncovering nests of pedophiles. I think that a pedophile witch hunt is taking place and even being friendly to a child is enough to get accused of being a pedophile.
@@laptv2144 civil law restricts rights to the rich because only the rich can sue.
Australian freedom doesn't exist. Even if you aren't poor and can pay the freedom taxes ( for smoking, drinking and permits for camping like activities like sites, fires, singing fishing and hunting etc.) can you call it freedom if you can't order a beer after 11 pm? I laughed at the movie the demolition man back in the day believing that level of control with never exist. boy am I surprised now.
Australians do have a right to freedom of speech and that is why so few of them vote in 2024. However, there are people who are unsure about Australian vaccine manufacturers.
Australia is a overseas military outpost.
A countrie that submit to the more powerfull, defacto surrenders the rights of its citizens, and put above, the geopolitical needs of the power to which it has become subservient.
Turn it that way, or turn it the other way to.suit the discourse, but as they say in Africa: " the lion has no friends".
I feel like Australian culture should and looks a lot like America, so kind of shocking that Australia just doesn’t give a fuck, especially because they easily have one of the best election systems in the world
Cool vid I watched it in class 🤗🤗
Freedom of expression without freedom to offend. That's just a stupid way of saying you have no free speech.
The government doesn't get to tell me what my rights are. Only God does
I was blocked all through cov shoots saying Bio weapon.
You can't offend stupid people today.
Of course we do, it's protected under international covernant and supported by the Vienna convention of 1974
You can say whatever you want in China and Russia too, but there are repercussions. Just like there are in Australia. A perfect example is if you do not toe the leftist line. Don't mention the 'taking the knee' business the AFL players were forced to undertake. If you didn't you were shamed and banned.
YES.
Law?
- we cannot be ethically subject to arbitrary "statute" rules masquerading as "law" WHEN they disregard and subjugate the ethical right of the individual under God's Law alone. This has nothing to with religion and is about true and just jurisdiction.
SO REGULATED WE MIGHT AS LIVE IN CHINA
This has not aged well.
This is fucking enbarrasing
Pretty pathetic for a legal video to refer to a landmark free speech case in the High Court of the Commonwealth of Australia and show the coat of arms of NZ and the ABC logo when the case was brought by Australian Capital Television not the ABC.
I believe that free speech should be sacrosanct but you should never personalise. You can have absolutely no respect for people’s opinions but you should never rude to the person. I believe you can be savagely rude about what the person thinks. That seems to me a crucial distinction: people must be protected from discrimination by virtue of their race, but you cannot ring-fence their ideas. The moment you say that any idea system is sacred, whether it’s a religious belief system or a secular ideology, the moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible. What we have here in Australia is damn stupid. Protecting people from being offended is just pandering to those who have something to be offended about.
Oh...
It is people who make the laws
Answer is no
I thought that the UN charter which Australia is a signatory gives, us Australians the right to free/freedom of speech!
Correct me if I am wrong please.
Please cut to the chase too much word salad, don't compare USA to Australia.
Embarrassing
Okay let's give this university content a whirl, surely can't be too bad
...one sentence in and you're already fuckin wrong.
Okay so this was freedom of speech on a legal, big picture stage, but what about on a social and day to day occurrence? Didn't think a uni would wanna hint as to why they might be wrong on fuckin everything
Tf you on about mate?
Let me sum this video’s long winded ambiguity up in short: No
Good luck.
"Australia is a democratic country"; Wrong. Democracy ended with universal suffrage and that's a good thing because universal suffrage is far more inclusive then democracy.
"Most Australians grow up thinking they have a right..."; uhm, speaking for myself, no. I was warned by my parents that "rights" are a furphy or red herring or pink elephant.
Offensive language laws specifically target words of Germanic or class origin with sexual or scatological connotations and those laws, themselves, exemplify a hate crime.
At face value, the 'right' to 'freedom of speech' encompasses the right to slander, commit fraud + commit perjury. "Freedom of speech" isn't all pretty flowers and fluffy bunnies. We need a more explicit term because the current "freedom of speech" phrase just doesn't say it.
NO
What makes Australia a democracy? We started out as convicts and our laws were not democratic then and i do not see any change that has altered that situation. We do not have lots of votes on lots of issues, where the majority gets what they want. Neither are our elections first across the line, majority wins. I do not think we are a democracy, sorry. Maybe you can convibce me.
No
🧚🏻♂️☯️🌏
No men working here?
Such lefty propaganda. There are discussions for and against human rights acts and so on, but this came across as a propaganda piece for one side. And, by the way, despite how much you want this to be the case, international law 'does not technically apply to Australian law.' In fact, 'international law' does not apply to Australian law - at all. There is nothing technical about it.
A stupid question.
yeh but that is okay if I have no rights as an Australian ... I'm an Aussie we accept anything from the government as long as it's for our health and safety..
I love how this a endorsement to Murica