UK Freedom of Speech Based on Race: Free Speech Affirmative Action August 10, 2006
Posted by C.A.R.D in Action, Affirmative, affirmative action, Black bastards, Citizens Against Racism and Discrimination, Collins, David Taylor, Discrimination, expression, Free Speech, Freedom, freedom of expression, Freedom of Speech, grossly offensive, House of Lords, Niggers, offensive, Pakis, Race, Racism, Racist, Speech, UK, Wogs.comments closed
Earlier we brought you the story about how the racist principal of affirmative action was applied to the freedom of speech by a U.S. court judgement. Now it appears that this idea is also being applied in the UK’s House of Lords, as they will decide what is “grossly offensive” based on: “the standards of an open and just multi-racial society” and “taking account of their context and all relevant circumstances.” As well as, they stated that “The test is whether a message is couched in terms liable to cause gross offence to those to whom it relates.” Which seems very reminiscent of what the U.S. court said when restricting free speech based on race, religion, and sexual orientation. The story follows below:
A man who ranted and shouted in telephone calls to his MP should have been convicted for using racist terms that were “grossly offensive”. The offence is a necessary limitation on everyone’s right to freedom of expression, the House of Lords has ruled.
Freedom of Speech Based on Race: -First Amendment Affirmative Action July 21, 2006
Posted by C.A.R.D in affirmative action, Amendment, Asian, Bible, Bill of Rights, Black, Card, Catholics, Circuit Court, Citizens Against Racism and Discrimination, Discriminate, Discrimination, First, First amendment, First amendment affirmative action, Freedom, Freedom of Speech, Harper, Hispanic, Homosexual, Jewish, Latino, Muslim, Race, Racism, Religion, Sandra Day O'Connor, sexual orientation, Speech, Supreme Court, White.comments closed
For forty years, the United States has lived with a variety of government programs applying preferential treatment based on race or gender or both. These programs have generally been limited to education and public contracting.
Recently, in a 2-1 decision, a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a decision which may provide a foundation for applying preferential treatment to freedom of speech. If allowed to stand, the decision could authorize local governments to set varying limits to free expression, depending on the race, religion, or sexual orientation of the listener.
C.A.R.D 