Great letters - Mar 8 Free speech has some boundaries

GREAT PAIR OF LETTERS: THE 

TOP ONE HAS A SIMILAR THEME

 TO MINE!! SEE: 

Free speech has some boundaries

• THE AUSTRALIAN
• MARCH 08, 2014 12:00AM

• Print
• Save for later

SHARE

expand

• Share on facebook

YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

NEW! Discover news with your friends. Give it a try.
To get going, simply connect with your favourite social network:

Facebook

WORDS do matter and so there is a fine balance needed with former federal attorney-general Neil Brown’s plan for section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (”Race act’s 18C brings law into disrepute”. 7/3).

On one hand, the history of war, slavery and public order demonstrates that at certain times it is apt to make a pointed but necessary statement about the attitude or behaviour of a particular group of people, where race is the unifying factor.

On the other hand, free speech has self-evident logical boundaries and should not equate with any comment, anytime, such as yelling out polarising opinions at a funeral while a eulogy is being given.

A sense of maturity is needed when humans use the marvellous gift of speech and so the wisdom of Solomon is still pertinent: “Reckless words pierce like a sword and one who spares words is knowledgeable”.

Peter Waterhouse, Craigieburn, Vic

YOUR editorial correctly states that “a free and robust exchange of ideas is essential to democracy” and laudably chastises University of Sydney academic Jake Lynch for attempting to stifle any such exchange via his discriminatory boycotts of Israeli academics (”Free speech is a principle to be upheld consistently”, 6/3). However, your call for the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council to also abandon our support for section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act was a non sequitur.

Section 18C poses no threat to the exchange of ideas. It makes no ideas unlawful. It is concerned only with conduct done because of someone’s race which would cause them harm. It offers robust defences in section 18D exempting all academic, artistic and scientific work, and any statement, publication or discussion done for any genuine purpose in the public interest.

Your assertion that, “causing offence should not be a crime” involves a misunderstanding of how this legislation works. It creates no criminal offences - its purpose is to give civil recourse to people when bigots diminish the quality of their lives through deliberate racial harassment.

Colin Rubenstein, Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council, Melbourne, Vic

News for Letters Free speech has boundaries

The Guardian