Saturday 7 May 2022

You're Lucky You Haven't Experienced Real 'Hate Speech, Jessica....

Jessica Fostekew (apparently 'a comedian, actor and writer') is alarmed. She's had....wait for it...election material through her door!
It raises the practical question: are we allowed to post those opinions through a letterbox?

What, election material stating what the candidate stands for and will do if elected? Yes. Yes, we are. 

My partner and I asked the internet, via social media. A small storm ensued, so spicy that my partner deleted her tweet. It was too all-consuming. I’m, however, cracking on. The 2% saying it’s freedom of speech: surely, not when it’s hate speech?

No, 'hate speech' is banned. Obviously. Did you report this? 

Lewisham council replied, in effect, that candidates can state whatever opinions they like. Which I get. But really, with zero boundaries?

It appears so!  

There’s freedom of speech, and there’s freedom of hate speech, and there has to be some demarcation between the two. It’s the difference between shaking hands and punching.

So, what, exactly, did the candidate say? Call for gay people to be burned at the stake?

"Marriage: I pledge to cut through political correctness and simply state the truth that natural marriage between a man and a woman is the fundamental building block for a successful society, and the safest environment for raising children."


That's it? That doesn't even merit the tem 'controversial', never mind 'hate speech'.  


The Jannie said...

Jessica apparently hasn't heard that it's ok to look an idiot but there's no need to prove it in print. One of the problems with free speech is that you have to endure just so much drivel like this before you reach the delete button.

Ian J said...

This loonie can't even tell when a statement supports one side of an argument without attacking alternatives. 9This side being the one that is neccessary for humanity to continue) She needn't worry about me ever listening to her spouting her version of comedy (far less paying to)

Stonyground said...

Presumably the candidate is against gay marriage. Personally I don't have a problem with it but this person does. In reality, those opposed have lost that particular battle already, mainly because they didn't have any rational arguments against it, just unsupported assertions.

JuliaM said...

"...but there's no need to prove it in print."

We should call it the Vardy-Rooney Effect...

"She needn't worry about me ever listening to her spouting her version of comedy (far less paying to)"

I suspect none of the paying public will, but somehow, people like this never go hungry, do they?

"In reality, those opposed have lost that particular battle already..."

Quite, and it's a strange thing to campaign on, but I suspect that if she had been campaigning on some aspect (like abolition), Jessica would have quoted from the campaign literature.

The fact she didn't is telling.