Posts Tagged ‘discrimination’
Freedom has taken a battering in Netherlands lately and this latest news is a sad day for those of us who believe in free speech.
On a related note, it might be interesting to try and figure out what’s the best place for free speech today.
USA? Perhaps has the broadest protections for speech anywhere (thanks to the greatest piece of law ever written) with one sad exception: the obscenity statute. A culture of political correctness that is stronger than continental Europe does, however act as a social deterrent against certain types of speech.
Denmark? You will certainly not be prosecuted for obscenity, but hate speech laws exist — though they are rarely enforced.
Switzerland? Similar to Denmark, but also has laws against holocaust denial.
Netherlands? Till recently this would have been my answer, since their hate speech laws are not as broad and they will certainly not censor porn. Unfortunately they do have laws against discriminatory speech, which is what Wilders is (presumably) being charged under.
Ireland? I don’t know too much, but seems to be a good place. Technically laws against speech that ‘undermine public morality’ exist, but they are never enforced. They do not appear to have hate speech laws or holocaust denial laws.
It is a sign of how far anti-discrimination laws have gone when a dating website is sued for not including homosexuals in the matchmaking service. I completely agree with Jacob Sullum:
In a settlement with the New Jersey Attorney General’s Office, the online dating service eHarmony, until now limited to heterosexuals, has agreed to start matching men with men and women with women. The deal resolves a complaint by a gay man who claimed that eHarmony’s failure to accommodate homosexuals violated New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination.
[…] I’ve never bought the argument that gay marriage—i.e., the government’s evenhanded recognition of relationships between couples, without regard to sexual orientation—is a way of forcing “the gay agenda” onto people who object to it. But this coerced agreement, compelling a private business to provide a service it did not want to provide, certainly is. As Michelle Malkin notes, “this case is akin to a meat-eater suing a vegetarian restaurant for not offering him a ribeye or a female patient suing a vasectomy doctor for not providing her hysterectomy services.”
Also read this old article by Jason Dixon.
Posted in libertarianism, tagged canada, cartoons, danish, discrimination, ezra levant, free speech, freedom of speech, hate speech, islam, laws, liberty, offended feelings, rights on June 1, 2008| Leave a Comment »
OMG, this is so awesome!
But a little bit of background first. Ezra Levant is the publisher of Western Standard, a right-wing Canadian magazine. I quote from Glenn Greenwald’s post on Salon, where I first came across the video that appears next.
In February, 2006, he published the Danish Mohammed cartoons, which prompted an Islamic group’s imam to file a complaint against Levant with the Alberta Human Rights and Citizenship Commission, charging Levant with “advocating hatemongering cartoons in the media,” and the imam specifically accused Levant of “defaming me and my family because we follow and are related to Prophet Mohammed.”
Rather than dismiss the complaint as a blatant attempt to punish free thought and free speech, the Alberta Human Rights Commission announced that it would investigate. To do so, they compelled Levant to appear before a government agent and be interrogated about the cartoons he published, his thoughts and intent in publishing them, and the other circumstances surrounding his “behavior.” Under the law, the Commission has the power to impose substantial fines and other penalties on Levant.
Well, Levant insisted on recording the proceedings and was directed by the Commission not to publish the video, but he did so anyway. Just watch it! I would have replied in exactly the same words as Levant if I were in his situation, but it’s still f***ing awesome! Here’s the video.
Any restrictions on free speech by the government, yes even hateful and bigoted speech (except perhaps, speech that is part of a direct criminal conspiracy to incite violence) is fundamentally wrong. After all, it is only offensive speech that needs protection; thus the only kind of freedom of speech that is meaningful is the kind that has no caveats whatsoever. Hate-speech laws, ‘do-not-ridicule’ laws and holocaust denial laws have no place in a truly liberal society and they eventually come back to bite even their proponents, as many leftist intellectuals in Europe are discovering now.
Here are some previous posts by me on this theme.
Posted in education, libertarianism, people, tagged absurd, anti-discrimination, civil rights, college, course, dartmouth, discrimination, education, freedom of speech, funny, harassment, laws, lawsuit, offended feelings, priya venkatesan, professor, studies, title vii on April 30, 2008| 1 Comment »
This case is so absurd that it is difficult to take it seriously. Priya Venkatesan, who taught writing this year at Dartmouth College, is threatening to sue former students under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act for criticizing her in course feedbacks. This report has the details along with snippets of Ms Venkatesan’s own writing, which should leave no doubt in anyone’s mind why she got so poor evaluations.
Oh, and Title VII, for those who are unaware, is the primary federal law that prohibits discrimination in employment. For the life of me I don’t see how that can be used to sue the students, who are neither Ms Venkatesan’s employers nor her colleagues. Besides, as any lawyer would point out, they have an obvious first amendment right to censure their professor in evaluations. Maybe Ms Venkatesan has a postmodernist explanation for all this…
(Link via Instapundit)
Posted in education, India, libertarianism, tagged affirmative action, arjun singh, caste, discrimination, education, equality, freedom, indian laws, laws, liberty, private institutions, quotas, reservations on April 25, 2008| Leave a Comment »
Buoyed by its Supreme Court success on the reservation issue, the Indian government now wants to introduce quotas in private educational institutions as well.
I quote from the report in the Telegraph (emphasis mine) :
The Centre plans to table a bill to introduce quotas and control fees in private higher education institutes in the monsoon session of Parliament.
Aided and unaided private higher education institutes, including management schools, will be covered. But private unaided minority-run institutions will be exempt from the proposed law.