© Niall Carson/PAIrish justice minister Helen McEntee unveiled the controversial Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill in 2022
The Irish senate last week debated the controversial Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022.
The bill seeks to expand the range of people protected from hate speech to include those with "gender identities", including transgender or "gender other than those of male or female".
Supporters of the bill argue that Ireland needs to update its hate-speech protections to match the evolution of society and social media.
Comment: Correction: devolution.
The bill, introduced in 2022 by justice minister Helen McEntee, has drawn global interest, with Donald Trump Jr describing it as "insane" and Elon Musk as "very concerning".
Expected to become law
It is expected to become law later this year, with the Senate unlikely to make any major amendments, given its recommendations can be rejected by Parliament.
Under the law, existing offences such as assault or criminal damage will receive higher sentences if they are aggravated by "hatred".
Comment: In other words, thought crime.
The law will also criminalise possessing material intended to be shared that could incite hatred towards people with "protected characteristics". The material does not actually have to be disseminated to the public in any way.
Comment: Bad comrade saved memes on their phone.
Reacting to fears that the bill could have a chilling effect on free speech, the government last year told the Irish Times that the bar for criminal prosecution will be "very high".
Comment: No, it won't.
"Criminal incitement to hatred will not be an area that anybody will stray into by accident," the Department of Justice told the Irish Times.
Protecting 'vulnerable people'
In order to be prosecuted, government ministers have argued, people will have to deliberately and recklessly stir up hatred against citizens with "protected characteristics", which also include race, religion and disability.
Debating the law in the Senate last week, Irish Green Party senator Pauline O'Reilly said it was right to restrict people's freedom of speech to protect vulnerable people from "discomfort".
Comment: The vulnerable people here are the normal population, not the psychopathological minority coercing them into accepting a pseudo-reality.
"If a person's views on other people's identities make their lives unsafe and insecure, and cause them such deep discomfort that they cannot live in peace, our job as legislators is to restrict those freedoms for the common good," she said.
Comment: "A person's views." Thought crime.
"One cannot do and say whatever one likes in our society."
Comment: Thank you for making it clear that you are a tyrant.
Earlier in the debate, independent senator Ronan Mullen queried the wisdom of potentially punishing people for debating gender identity.
"Will mocking memes be tolerated?" he asked.
"Will carrying a placard stating 'Men cannot breastfeed' warrant a hate-speech investigation or up to five years' imprisonment, a lifelong label as a criminal hater and all of the stigma and life limitation that goes with that? Nobody actually knows."
'Misinformation and distortion'
Ms McEntee said that much of the debate around the legislation has "unfortunately also been subject to deliberate misinformation and distortion, including from fringe commentators and US-based social media personalities".
Comment: The only misinformation is that men can be women and vice versa.
She stressed that section 11 of the bill "explicitly" provides protection for freedom of expression, noting that "discussion or criticism of matters relating to a protected characteristic does not constitute incitement to hatred in and of itself".
Comment: Like anyone actually believes this will be respected when the rest of the bill essentially contradicts it.
Ms McEntee said: "You have a right to express your convictions and your opinions, no matter how unpopular they might be."
Helen Joyce, a former Economist journalist and director of advocacy at campaign group Sex Matters, disagreed in a series of posts on Twitter.
"It [the bill] is likely to criminalise voicing views that risk resulting in 'hatred' (remember, there's no definition of this!) towards male people who want access to women's changing rooms and sports because they feel female. Penalty: up to five years in jail.
"When a crime has no definition, anyone can be found guilty. And that's what's going to happen if this bill becomes law, because it criminalises 'hate' without defining it."
Reader Comments
BTW: no ancient matriarchy survived till present day. I guess that means something?
And yes: once they learn…
But politics .... women who desire power ... in the same ways that a man obtains power ... I've had the misfortune of working with ambitious women, and honestly they are power-hungry and worse than men (albright and hrc come to mind instantly). And I suspect most of humanity of both sexes have been dumbed down so much they don't realize how they are manipulated --- but women DO talk, and from what I gather, many accept the position of being manipulated if it works to their interests in SOME way. So maybe they aren't altogether clueless, it is just they are codependent (same outcome, different causalities)
I disagree. Too much of a generalization.
Today in Canada, should a difficult tenant face eviction, or difficult employee face disciplinary action, they can claim discrimination because they identify as one or more of the letters in LGBQT+
I wish them luck.
I have freckles, is that protected? People used to laugh at me, can they be prosecuted?
There is some serious harm being done to ordinary people with an old fashioned opinion, such as, Male and Female, He made them.
At latest through procreation (or the lack thereof), but usually because of pushback. Humans are not born as blank slates, as our unelected "masters" would like it to have.
And as soon as general living conditions really become worse, I expect this to become violent.
I don't see any anger directed at 'authorities', even from the jabbed normies who are realizing they swallowed the hook, line and sinker. No, those angry normies direct their anger at me and the other unjabbed.
When shite hits the fan it would be wise to be your own saviour and stay the heck away from everyone else.
As you say, it will get violent but it will not be directed towards the guilty.
I had catched a few glimpses of how incredibly thin the layer of culture and civilisation is ...