[DEBATE] : Hate speech

[Charlene Smith]

I wonder if we would tolerate postings that support racist lynchings?  I 
wonder if we would tolerate listings that say the Holocaust was a lie? 
Would we simply block comments that most Muslims are suicide bombers in 
waiting?
Would I get away with saying "black men can't keep it in their pants" as 
Mbeki wrongly claimed I said - correcting it the next day and pointing out 
it was an African American professor from Univ Dartmouth\ Mass?
Would we tolerate me saying that children should be beaten to within an inch 
of their life if they are 'disobedient'?
Every civilised society, every democracy supports freedom of expression, BUT 
it says with freedom comes responsibility.  I cannot say or do anything that 
creates harm to others, that has the potential to incite harm, that the 
majority find repugnant, distressing or hurtful.
In a debate forum such as ours vigorous debate is encouraged, a wide sharing 
of ideas ... but as Patrick tries to guide us toward, there is an 
expectation that we should be respectful.
Why is it that women are expected to be tolerant of disgraceful ideas that 
support harm to women and we should merely press a block senders button?  Or 
leave the list in disgust as I have more than once.  This is supposed to be 
an intellectual forum, not a dog fight.  We are expected, so I believe, to 
express views based on some levels of sensitivity, lots of levels of careful 
thought, research and intellect, and to present them as far as possible 
respectfully.
Our great democracy - and today we celebrate our Constitution's 10th 
anniversary - protects freedom of expression, but also has limits on what we 
may say, write, broadcast, disseminate... because no freedom is unfettered 
of responsibility to broader society. I cannot act alone, I cannot speak 
only for myself, because I need to peacefully co-exist, I need to respect my 
fellow citizens...  And that means I cannot be the voice of abuse.  Respect 
needs to  be our guide.

Charlene