549
submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

JK Rowling has challenged Scotland's new hate crime law in a series of social media posts - inviting police to arrest her if they believe she has committed an offence.

The Harry Potter author, who lives in Edinburgh, described several transgender women as men, including convicted prisoners, trans activists and other public figures.

She said "freedom of speech and belief" was at an end if accurate description of biological sex was outlawed.

Earlier, Scotland's first minister Humza Yousaf said the new law would deal with a "rising tide of hatred".

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.

Ms Rowling, who has long been a critic of some trans activism, posted on X on the day the new legislation came into force.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 53 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Have as many opinions as you want, but if you spread shit like "we should exterminate the lesser races" and "trans people are rapists" you earn a vacation at the greybar hotel for abusing your right of free speech to infringe on other people's rights.

[-] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago

The question is where the line is drawn and how to make sure the state is not abusing those powers to suppress opinions that it sees dangerous. A good example are cases when protecting the children is used as argument for more surveillance. This seems foelr me to go along the same lines.

[-] Red_October@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago

Sometimes the question of "Where do we draw the line" is an important, valid question that must be considered. Sometimes, the answer to that question can also be "I don't know precisely, but this is damn well over it."

I'm not saying that hack writer is necessarily to that stage, but we absolutely should not allow "But where do you draw the line" to turn into "Everything is permitted because what about splitting hairs."

[-] gapbetweenus@feddit.de -3 points 7 months ago

Than I will rephrase the question. Who should draw the line and do you trust people in power to draw it in a fair way? What if conservatives are holding that power against opinions they think are dangerous?

[-] FanciestPants@lemmy.world 7 points 7 months ago

I'm not totally familiar with how the Scottish legal system works, but wouldn't the line be drawn by a jury of peers, and not necessarily the people in power?

[-] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 1 points 7 months ago

Good question. But than again - not sure you want to be judged on sensitive topic by a group of peers, I'm not a huge fan of that concept to be honest.

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

he question is where the line is drawn

[Calling for the extermination of people based on race/ethnicity/religion/gender/disability]

[Discrimination based on race/ethnicity/religion/gender/disability]

|||||||||| THE LINE ||||||||||

.

.

[Literally 1984]

Most sane countries don't have a lot trouble with this.

[-] gapbetweenus@feddit.de 3 points 7 months ago

Calling for extermination, I would agree on. Since it's more than an opinion it's a call to action.

Most sane countries don’t have a lot trouble with this.

I'm really curious for examples.

this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024
549 points (94.6% liked)

News

23265 readers
3543 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS