Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022 - Read OP

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810403#Comment_119810403

Thanks it was an interesting question given the comments about reflecting international best practices etc.

Annasopra

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810392#Comment_119810392

Indeed. All the hand wringing here is...... pointless

xxxxxxl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810627#Comment_119810627

IIRC ofc could be wrong. But it still can be amended while going through the system. I'm going to take Overheals advice at the moment and wait for the actually printed law. They did raise an interesting issue with political speech. I have my own opinion on that but the poster is of good faith.

Edit and no my account has not been hacked. 😀

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810267#Comment_119810267

You haven't read the Irish one either, based on tonight's offerings.

xxxxxxl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810737#Comment_119810737

I did actually There was a back and forth with a poster our opinions differed. They also presented a case in relation to political speech and best practise. That's where I have decided to wait for the actually printed legislation. I'm not so intrenched I cannot be swayed by logic and reason. ATM it's a case of wait and see.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810635#Comment_119810635

Is there some actual mechanism by which the dail can amend the law without the bicameral process, or is there just the concern they might. I think you might be thinking of regulatory rules. At least in the US laws often get written so the executive agency eg. The EPA, is authorized to make ‘necessary rules to enact the purpose of this bill’ etc. so say the EPA might make the rule that it’s not going to sign off on industrial permits near the local water supply, etc.

In the case of writing a criminal statute for an offense though I’ve never seen a case where the agency could change the law - ie. The FBI can’t decide homicide is a misdemeanor, the 18 US Code defines the homicide offense in black and white so the FBI is aware of what it can prosecute, ie. What the courts will actually hold up, ie. “Whoever takes a life etc. etc. shall be guilty of homicide in the first degree etc”

xxxxxxl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810791#Comment_119810791

I'm not Irish but IIRC proposed legislation goes though the Oireachtas there presented as bills. From there they can be unchanged or amended. Maybe someone with a little more knowledge can say if this is incorrect.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/visit-and-learn/how-parliament-works/how-laws-are-made/

I read this pretty sure I'm right but you never know.

Third Stage – Committee Stage

The Bill is examined section by section and amendments may be made

Committee Stage is a detailed examination of each section of the Bill and an opportunity for Government and Opposition Members to make changes to the text. Committee Stage in the Dáil is usually taken in an Oireachtas select committee.

Once each section of the Bill has been agreed to, the Bill is set down for Report Stage.

Before Committee Stage, Members who want to change a Bill may put down amendments, and a list of the amendments is published. During the Committee Stage debate, Members are called on to move each amendment and discuss it with the Minister.

There is no limit to the number of times a Member may speak on an amendment, so Committee Stage can be lengthy. The Minister then says whether he or she accepts the amendment. A Member who disagrees with the Minister’s decision on an amendment may call for a division by saying “Vótáil”.

for example.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810809#Comment_119810809

Oh right got you yes, the bill could still be changed by the drafters before it hits the floor for chamber debate and voting. Bait and switches at this stage are rare but can happen (USA PATRIOT act iirc had a lot of controversial last second changes to the text before voting)

xxxxxxl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810815#Comment_119810815

Yeah sorry I used system instead of Oireachtas I can see how that was maybe misleading.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810627#Comment_119810627

Not so.

Hate speech laws, in any form, are a regressive step. It's entirely possible that very few people will be convicted under these laws.

But that's missing the point.

When you zoom out to see the bigger picture, we are moving toward legislation that impacts what you can and cannot say. The mission creep of these kinds of laws is real. On this subject matter, the range of what can be said always gets narrower. It sets a dangerous precedent because it slowly advances us to a position where a small number of people decide what falls under so-called hate speech. That is never a good thing.

Society worked perfectly well under existing legislation. This law solves no problem; instead, it creates problems - including latent problems.

These laws yet again constrict what can and cannot be said. Not because of the actual content of the legislation but because of the ever advancing chilling effect on this particular subject. That's why you support the legislation even though it solves no actual, real-life problem.

You and others would rather us to focus on the merits and demerits of specific clauses and the language therein (though that said, the idea that self-identification of any gender is considered a "protected characteristic" is absurd; PCs should only be for immutable factors and not gender, which can be subjectively changed by the person).

That's because you don't want us to focus on the much bigger picture here - which is as insidious as it is censorious.

Annasopra

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119811366#Comment_119811366

The existing legislation is the 1989 Act which regulates hate speech. It clearly doesnt work a man who sets up a facebook page to "promote the use of knacker babies as sharkbait" cant be convicted.

About 80% of whats discussed here is nothing to do with the bill. Theres a lot of bogeymen. Theres a lot of handwringing. Theres a lot of things nothing to do with the proposed law. We have had a similar law since 1989. This is simply updating the legal framework on incitement to hatred. If I start publishing material regularly calling for Irish people to be murdered I would be prosecuted and rightfully so.

it slowly advances us to a position where a small number of people decide what falls under so-called hate speech. 

Again another irrelevant argument. Nothing in the proposed law does this.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119810745#Comment_119810745

I asked you what specific section you said gave you the impression that misgendering someone would result in a prosecution for hate crime, and you failed to name one. Now, it's possible you've since read it (it was linked to by another poster) in which case, care to answer now?

Fandymo

Here is the bullshit acts “definition” of gender. Absolutely laughable. Lionel Hutz would be able to drive an articulated truck through this nonsense. Act is there to scare people into submission to the T+ lunacy more than anything else.

 ““gender” means the gender of a person or the gender which a person expresses as the person’s preferred gender or with which the person identifies and includes transgender and a gender other than those of male and female,”

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119811770#Comment_119811770

BUllshit purely because you disagree with it, or....?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119811813#Comment_119811813

Something that is subjective should not be a protected characteristic.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119811829#Comment_119811829

Who said it was subjective? At what point are you telling someone you've never met or had any contact with that YOU know who THEY are better than they know themselves?

Fandymo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119811854#Comment_119811854

What is the definition of a gender?

How is gender ascertained?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119811854#Comment_119811854

To take one example: gender fluid; one day they feel female, the next day male.

That's the very definition of subjective.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812024#Comment_119812024

It's ascertained through personal experience / expression.

Biological sex is objectively established, which is why this is a legitimate example of a protected characteristic.

You cannot prove the objective existence of genders. They are by definition personal experiences and so are subjective and so should not be considered a protected characteristic.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812024#Comment_119812024

gender

/ˈdʒɛndə/

Learn to pronounce

noun

noun: gender; plural noun: genders

1.

either of the two sexes (male and female), especially when considered with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones. The term is also used more broadly to denote a range of identities that do not correspond to established ideas of male and female.

------

If that's not what you're ooking for, read my signature.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812040#Comment_119812040

Not really - point is that the person chooses what they identify with, as opposed to a random individual on an internet forum.

You're mixing up the concept of gneder with what the different types are.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812070#Comment_119812070

Or those experiences are subjective and SHOULDNT BE ATTACKED ?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812088#Comment_119812088

How do you objectively establish the existence of any gender identity without asking a person to tell you?

If you know a way, I'd love to know.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812097#Comment_119812097

If you have a doubt, what's wrong with asking?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812112#Comment_119812112

I note you're dodging the question.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812097#Comment_119812097

I can’t understand why this would be important. It’s not as though the law provides you being charged or arrested for reasonably, incorrectly referring to someone in public or whatever by their preferred pronoun. Hello sir. What I’m a woman? Arrest him! But I’m a woman too! Everyone goes to jail! Etc.

thats not how the law proposed works?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812160#Comment_119812160

Answer is: I don't know. I've always asked and it's always worked for me.

Other than an outlandishly hypotheitcal situation or you purposely being a dick to prove a point, I really, don't know what scenario you're trying to present here.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812175#Comment_119812175

That's dodging the question, too.

Protected characteristics should not include subjective factors. It undermines what it means to be a protected characteristic.

Overheal

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812186#Comment_119812186

No not according to international best practices. I’m afraid you’ll have to expand on your argument I don’t buy it.

When I Google “protected characteristic” it’s the 5th one that comes up: gender identity.

If it helps your sensibilities just think of it as a disability and move on with your life.

The answer is grow up and ask them Eskimo.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119812202#Comment_119812202

Protected characteristics should never include personal expression / subjectivity. No matter who says it - Helen McEntee or anyone else. It's a dreadful way to draft laws.