Laws intended to change how individuals think—about anything—require enforced silencing. If the “Freedom for All Americans” meme is about freedom (which it’s not), then it’s only about negative freedom. That is, freedom from “discrimination.” Freedom from “hate.” Which basically gives carte blanche to those holding power (ultimately, the state) to define and cherry pick whatever “discrimination” and “hate” may mean before granting whatever due process is left over for the accused.
So laws of this sort, hiding under the fig leaf of “anti-discrimination,” will give the state the power to police speech and behaviors.
Coercive “unity” of the sort proposed by Singer, Gill, et al. in their “American Unity” means a collectivist type of unity that is not voluntary, but enforced in law. The actual enforcement mechanism for anti-discrimination measures might still be up in the air, but likely involves the creation of a host of new “human rights” commissions—basically hate tribunals set up on the local, state, and federal levels. This has already been done in Canada.
—Stella Morabito, LGBT Activists Arm For Further War Against Free Speech
We already have our hate tribunal in the UK – it’s called the Equality Commission. You may have heard that the Equality Commission in Northern Ireland, where ‘gay marriage’ is illegal, have successfully prosecuted the Christian bakery Ashers for declining to ice a cake with the words ‘Support Gay Marriage’. This is not a case of refusing to supply a cake to a homosexual – as the shop stated, they had no idea of the ‘sexual orientation’ of the person placing the order. Now Christians in business in the UK are being deliberately targeted by the LGBT community and forced to produce slogans with which they vehemently disagree, which infringes their consciences, and which (in Northern Ireland) promotes something illegal. If the businessman refuses, the LGBT community complain to the Equality Commission, who prosecute with the full backing of the state.
Some years back, on Heidelblog v. 1.0, I had a brief exchange with an individual who claimed to be a member of a Canadian (BC, IIRC) human rights tribunal. This person saw nothing wrong with using the power of the state to suppress the speech of certain folks because “they like to cause trouble”.
Gates of Vienna reports on involuntary psychiatric confinement for Islamophobia
We posted briefly yesterday about the mayor of a French town who was “involuntarily confined” because of his public expressions of anti-Islamic sentiment. The following articles, which were originally published at Vlad Tepes in a slightly different form, provide a more detailed account. Many thanks to Sassy for the translations from AFP and Figaro.
AFP: Robert Chardon was hospitalized under the involuntary confinement provision
Involuntary confinement applies to psychiatric issues as per French law (How French administration explains the involuntary confinement)
Robert Chardon was forcibly confined to hospital this Friday as per a third party request for reason of ‘incoherence of his statements’
http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/05/involuntary-confinement-for-islamophobia/
To be clear, the power and influences of these human rights tribunals in Canada has been rolled back quite significantly in the last few years, partly owing to the efforts of Reformed Christians.
good to hear
And we still have in America a written Bill of Rights, which includes the 1st Amendment, unlike Canada or the UK. A bit of an importance difference yet.
Well that piece of paper hasn’t done too much has it?
Trent, I’m a lawyer. That piece of paper has done a lot.
Richard,
This is encouraging, what you are saying. I know it isn’t a bed of roses though… Perhaps an example to help Trent understand would be in order…
Wes. can you provide some examples? Thanks.