Since I posted the article about the threats made to Geordie Guy I’ve had questions about how I can be so sure that this threat came from a pro-filter advocate and not just some random nutter with a phone number. That’s a valid question so I’ve updated the article to include where the part of the interview where Geordie brings up the specific mention of his letter to the editor. Apparently the man did use several terms used within the debate.
I’ve also been reminded that pro-filter lobbyists have not been immune to vitriolic and abusive correspondence from people against the filter. So far they have received more media coverage than this article and have been addressed by the more prominent figures in the anti-censorship lobby.
Nobody on either side if this debate should have to deal with threats or abuse. It was wrong when some knuckle-dragging neanderthals sent abusive emails to Bernadette McMenamin and it’s wrong here as well.
Threats and the like are an unfortunate side-effect of using emotive arguments in lobbying to the extent that the DBCDE and the ACL have in the filter debate. While saying ‘they started it’ to Bernadette and Jim Wallace might be completely immature and pointless, cause and effect operate indiscriminately. Bernadette did try and call the anti-censorship lobby a bunch of paedophiles and it was only then that the idiot brigade fired up.
In Geordie’s case it would appear that his use of facts and logic have ruined things for the other side. Either way, nobody, at all, should have to deal with abusive or threatening correspondence of any type.
No, I don’t think that calling Bernie “batshit crazy” in a cartoon counts as abusive or threatening. I don’t yet have the resources to start publicising by law suit.
Before you ask, I draw my own personal line at me. I push the boundaries of civility as far as I think they should be pushed, though I’m fine for others to go further if they so wish. I think that an adult should be able to express anything that is in their heart to express. I also think, however, that the right is abused when you use it for no other purpose but to attack another unfairly.
Free speech is a tricky situation to pull off properly but offers far greater rewards for progression and the righting of wrongs. The Government would like to see a controlled mockery of free speech as it is easier for them to work with. It’s not their fault, it’s just practical.
They don’t want to have to think too hard about how to do it so they don’t try, they just pretend that they value it and hope everyone thinks that it’s good enough.
I think that the most annoying and intellectually offensive line that the government has come out with in this whole debate is that they don’t see it as being a debate about freedom of speech. Thank you Kevin, I’m glad that you deem it worthy of your time to dictate how the nation sees the issue.
‘Ruddkipz’ is just being belligerent because he knows it took us 3 elections to get rid of the last muppet we had as a PM.
