Caleb Bond: 18C part of movement to sanitise public sphere of views at odds with PC doctrine

IT is a national disgrace that for years, through Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, Australia has restricted speech for no other reason than someone might get upset.

Tony Burke MP attends a ‘Walk of Respect’ against proposed changes to Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act.

IT is a national disgrace that for years, through Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, Australia has restricted speech for no other reason than someone might get upset.

The law, which has existed since 1995, makes it illegal to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” someone on the basis of their race, nationality or skin colour.

Offence is most often taken, not given. The idea that someone could be liable on such subjective terms is outrageous.

Offence is part and parcel of open discussion. I expect people are often offended by my columns but does that mean they should be rushing me to court?

Cindy Prior, a former Queensland University of Technology administrative officer, is currently seeking $250,000 in damages from a number of students under 18C. The students made comments about Ms Prior’s Aboriginality on Facebook after she refused them use of a computer suite.

Is this the sort of piffle we want clogging our courts? Have we really become so sensitive that we need the Government to step in every time someone insults us?

Free speech is the most fundamental of the freedoms we enjoy. It is the one thing that stands between totalitarian rule and the people. It holds others accountable and allows everyone a voice. Without it, there are no other freedoms.

We cannot stand by and watch our right to freedom of speech be eroded in the name of something as frivolous as preventing offence. However, slowly but surely, the victim industry is eroding free speech.

The ACT Parliament last week passed laws making religious vilification a crime. Those falling foul of the new law could face criminal conviction and fines of up to $7500.

Canberrans could be called on by the police for making a rude comment about someone’s religion on social media. How I weep for my country.

The law, proposed by the Greens’ Shane Rattenbury, was supported by the Liberals, who have gone soft on free speech. Rattenbury said offensive behaviour towards Muslims was one of the biggest intolerance issues of our time.

Being a Greens representative, he naturally thought the solution was to slap on a restrictive law instead of addressing the views of supposedly rampant Islamophobes. We see this approach time and again. It never works.

Banning someone’s views sends them underground. They might not be broadcasting them, but they are still expressing them in the privacy of their own homes.

Surely, if the Left’s motive is to stop racism they would want all racist views brought to the fore so they can counter them.

Or is it more about suppressing people with unpopular opinions? 18C is part of a wider movement to sanitise the public sphere of views not consistent with politically correct doctrine.

The Left is so insecure in its views that the only response it can give to counterarguments is to ban them.

After all, they’re the first to sink the boot into Christians when someone doing the same to Muslims would be branded Islamophobic. Offence is okay, so long as you’re offending the right people.

Sack cartoonist Bill Leak, sack broadcaster Alan Jones – they won’t stop until everyone conforms.

If we as a society do not like someone’s view, we can say so without government interference. It is simply a matter of principle: 18C must be repealed in the name of maintaining our most important freedom.