Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001

Joined
May 16, 2001
Posts
8,144
Likes
14
Location
Brisbane
Thread starter Moderator #1
Something all users should read, but particularly those in this board after some recent displays of particularly distasteful, petty behaviour.

***

The Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001 values freedom of expression and the ability of all citizens to participate equally in society. However, it acknowledges that vilifying conduct can reduce peoples ability to participate. In describing the unlawful conduct involved in racial vilification (section 7) the Act states that a person must not, on the ground of the race of another person or class of persons, engage in conduct that incites hatred against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of that other person or class of person.

The behaviour may be a single act or acts over a number of occasions, and may occur in or outside Victoria. The Act makes specific reference to it including the "use of the internet or e-mail". A person is also prohibited from encouraging, authorising, or assisting another person to act in a racially vilifying manner under the Act (section 15).

The following web sites provide further useful information in this area:

1. www.eoc.vic.gov.au This is the web site of the Equal Opportunity Commission Victoria. It has links to brochures on various topics, including one on resolving race complaints and others on racial vilification.

2. www.hreoc.gov.au This is the web site of the Commonwealth Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. It has a section specifically dedicated to racial discrimination. Within this there is a section on cyber-racism that discusses how racially offensive material on the internet may violate the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.

***

We have tried to allow some of the racist comments stand so that other users can see the stupidity that can breed if left unchecked. But from here on in we'll be taking harsh action on anything we see that might violate the various Acts in place.

This is the law.

If we are ordered to reveal your identity to the police or other authorities under the terms of the various Acts we won't be fighting it too hard. These Acts include the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 (Vic), the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cwth), the Racial Hatred Act 1999 (Cwth).

If you cannot discuss issues dealing with race and religion in a thoughtful rather than emotive manner this entire board will simply be suspended. I can't afford the fines - can you?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Frodo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 17, 2000
Posts
12,595
Likes
22
Location
Perth, Western Australia.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Post Count: 125,527
#3
Most of that is commonwealth (meaningless) or state legislation. Not Federal.

And I have never heard of a prosecution is Australia.

It's all about interpretation...what one person feels is vilification another just thinks as being facts.

What you are attempting is the age old attempt of attacking freedom of speech. I guess these subjects offend you rather than have any judicial reality. Well I suppose it is your site!!!


For me, I'll just call it as I see it and you can ban me or report me to the Fuehrer if needbe :mad:
 

B2..

Team Captain
Joined
Oct 1, 2003
Posts
564
Likes
0
Location
Coming down the stairs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
#8
I don't think he's trying to that, Frodo. Appleyard in fact stated that he wanted to keep some of the sillier, more provocative posts up there as an example.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but to leave posts like those up could lead to the prosecution of the owners of this board. It's called covering your arse.

Originally posted by Frodo
......What you are attempting is the age old attempt of attacking freedom of speech. I guess these subjects offend you rather than have any judicial reality. Well I suppose it is your site!!!


For me, I'll just call it as I see it and you can ban me or report me to the Fuehrer if needbe :mad:
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#9
Originally posted by Appleyard

If you cannot discuss issues dealing with race and religion in a thoughtful rather than emotive manner this entire board will simply be suspended. I can't afford the fines - can you?
Does this include using the words "dumb arab"?
 

bunsen burner

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
32,664
Likes
1,427
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
#10
Originally posted by Frodo
It's all about interpretation...what one person feels is vilification another just thinks as being facts.

What you are attempting is the age old attempt of attacking freedom of speech.
Seem to have changed your tune somewhat Frodo. It wasn't so long ago that you were crying like an anglo-saxon whitey over other peoples use of speech freedom (or in your words, "abuse").
 
Joined
May 16, 2001
Posts
8,144
Likes
14
Location
Brisbane
Thread starter Moderator #11
If it was up to me I'd leave most of the stuff because it does nothing more than show what twits some people are and reminds us that these twits are out there, but some of it goes beyond the pale.

I'm already in (reasonably amicable) discussion with certain people in the departments responsible for some of those Acts after some of the comments on the boards were brought to their attention at various times. No surprise that their view of what might contravene the legislation doesn't tally with mine but we'll work that out over time.

Just reminding you of the laws of this country and giving everyone fair warning of how I'll handle demands for information on site members: on this issue I'll to hand them over when requested by any authorities who have the power to demand them. I won't put the site through grief to protect your right to anonymously abuse people of other races and religions. Never gonna happen my friend.

As per the terms of use of this site since day one.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Posts
13,342
Likes
5,187
Location
Location!
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
pivotonians
Admin #13
Does that mean calling someone a whinging pom isn't allowed?

Or that I can't knock people for no good reason other than that they are from Western Australia?



or South Australia?



or Queensland?



or New South Wales?



or Tasmania?






or support Hawthorn?
 

lenny&carl

Premiership Player
Joined
Sep 23, 2003
Posts
4,038
Likes
629
Location
#1 Daft Prick
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Collingwood
#14
yes well all these questions about what counts and what doesn't, or what's kosher & what isn't, these are interesting questions. But it's not the mods' laws, it's the govt's laws, so the mods' are wise to sidestep it and avoid any heat. If we want to stick to our guns and say that what we say is ok to say, then I guess we can tell it to the judge.
 
Joined
May 16, 2001
Posts
8,144
Likes
14
Location
Brisbane
Thread starter Moderator #15
Just discuss these issues with some thought and you'll be OK. If you want to say "most people of x [race|religion] are y" you had better have some published statistics to back it up.
 

GuruJane

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
15,545
Likes
1,698
Location
home of the mighty sa
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Hawthorn, Tottenham
#16
Please advise ..

Is the statement "Arabs are NOT gutless" acceptable under the Racial Tolerance Act?

I ask, humbly, as Lestat has posted objections to my recent declaration to this effect.
 

Frodo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 17, 2000
Posts
12,595
Likes
22
Location
Perth, Western Australia.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Post Count: 125,527
#17
Well that's the point. Just what is acceptable and what isn't? It's okay to talk about the 'LAW' but exactly what is unacceptable under this law and exactly what is the process of finding out members real names so they can be prosecuted. And where is there evidence of any person being prosecuted for posting anonomously on an internet website? Because this is very tame as a forum with respect to vilification, you don't have to look far to see some real hatred. Yet where are the prosecutions. And what of our many overseas posters, how do they get prosecuted?
I can understand Appleyard making a statement to cover his own bum but no need to flower it up.

BB, I would really prefer this site to have no 'vilification' or personal abuse at all, but I lost that argument a long time ago.


I would pose a question though. If Paedophiles started a religious movement, or rapists, then would it be against the law to say bad things about them? How about the Christian brothers? Are we not alowed to vilify them any more, despite the abuses?
 

B2..

Team Captain
Joined
Oct 1, 2003
Posts
564
Likes
0
Location
Coming down the stairs
Other Teams
Bulldogs
#18
I suggest that Appleyard is not the person anyone here should be asking for clarification on what is or isn't acceptable under the act.

The relevant authority may be a better starting point. Do your homework and ask there, if you're genuinely worried.

However, there'd only be a few who would have anything to be concerned about, and they know who they are.
 

Lestat

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Posts
7,356
Likes
41
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Arsenal
#19
Originally posted by GuruJane
Please advise ..

Is the statement "Arabs are NOT gutless" acceptable under the Racial Tolerance Act?

I ask, humbly, as Lestat has posted objections to my recent declaration to this effect.
C'mon Jane...at least be honest. The original name of your thread was....'Why are arabs gutless'....

Besides...my comment was tongue in cheek. I'm used to your bigotry. :)

I'm egyptian...remember?
 

afc9798

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Posts
7,495
Likes
19
Location
To the Left of the Right
AFL Club
Adelaide
#20
Originally posted by Frodo
Well that's the point. Just what is acceptable and what isn't? It's okay to talk about the 'LAW' but exactly what is unacceptable under this law and exactly what is the process of finding out members real names so they can be prosecuted. And where is there evidence of any person being prosecuted for posting anonomously on an internet website? Because this is very tame as a forum with respect to vilification, you don't have to look far to see some real hatred. Yet where are the prosecutions. And what of our many overseas posters, how do they get prosecuted?
I can understand Appleyard making a statement to cover his own bum but no need to flower it up.

BB, I would really prefer this site to have no 'vilification' or personal abuse at all, but I lost that argument a long time ago.


I would pose a question though. If Paedophiles started a religious movement, or rapists, then would it be against the law to say bad things about them? How about the Christian brothers? Are we not alowed to vilify them any more, despite the abuses?
If you can back something up with facts, then you have no need to worry. I think you're just playing semantics with this subject. This act is a legitimate tool to weed out people like Noodnuts who openly abuse an entire race of people with no justification other than his own blind hatred and ignorance. He may not ever be prosecuted, but at least he may think twice. As for tracing who the users are, it can be done easily by supplying the IP address of the user. It is more difficult if it is an on campus computer or the like, but it hasn't stopped Feds catching those using PC's for child pornography or for distributing viruses etc. An IP address can be monitored to find out when the person is using it and what sites they access.

As for the Christian brothers, it is not OK to vilify them as a whole, but it would be OK to refer to ones who are known to have offended as this in then a matter of record and cannot be classed as vilification.
 

Frodo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 17, 2000
Posts
12,595
Likes
22
Location
Perth, Western Australia.
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Post Count: 125,527
#21
Originally posted by afc9798
If you can back something up with facts, then you have no need to worry. I think you're just playing semantics with this subject. This act is a legitimate tool to weed out people like Noodnuts who openly abuse an entire race of people with no justification other than his own blind hatred and ignorance. He may not ever be prosecuted, but at least he may think twice. As for tracing who the users are, it can be done easily by supplying the IP address of the user. It is more difficult if it is an on campus computer or the like, but it hasn't stopped Feds catching those using PC's for child pornography or for distributing viruses etc. An IP address can be monitored to find out when the person is using it and what sites they access.

As for the Christian brothers, it is not OK to vilify them as a whole, but it would be OK to refer to ones who are known to have offended as this in then a matter of record and cannot be classed as vilification.
Okay, it may be semantics, but I do attack religions because they are all vile. So I am a vilificator (if that's a word). That's behind my defensive reply. I don't blame applebum for protecting his site but if you feel that religion and those that post based upon evil religious beliefs are not worthy of vilification, then I believe that such vilification is in the interest of not only Australia but the world. That such should be deemed illegal is crud, but that such should result from a website in individual legal action is absurd.
Vilification of a religion is reasonable, vilification of a person based upon his/her beliefs is not IMO. However, this forum is not mine and basically any insult goes.
 

afc9798

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 21, 2002
Posts
7,495
Likes
19
Location
To the Left of the Right
AFL Club
Adelaide
#22
Originally posted by Frodo
Okay, it may be semantics, but I do attack religions because they are all vile. So I am a vilificator (if that's a word). That's behind my defensive reply. I don't blame applebum for protecting his site but if you feel that religion and those that post based upon evil religious beliefs are not worthy of vilification, then I believe that such vilification is in the interest of not only Australia but the world. That such should be deemed illegal is crud, but that such should result from a website in individual legal action is absurd.
Vilification of a religion is reasonable, vilification of a person based upon his/her beliefs is not IMO. However, this forum is not mine and basically any insult goes.
As an agnostic, I don't much care for any particular religion, but to blame religion in itself is wrong. What you should attack is the specific examples of those within the cosy confines of religion, who use it to justify what they do. The basis of most religions is peace and harmony, which is a noble goal, but it is those who exploit faith to kill and hurt others that deserve venom, not the religion itself.
 

evo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 29, 2003
Posts
27,433
Likes
17,030
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
#23
While I have no reason to vilify anyone here-I basically have no opinion on anyones race or religion,they all look the same to me.:D I find it a little dissapointing that the governemnt feels the need to track down it's citizens over a few words on an internet site,ussually said in jest or ignorance.How does calling someone a green so and so who worships the wrong god "incites hatred against, serious contempt for, or revulsion or severe ridicule of that other person or class of person."?
 

demon_dave

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Posts
2,727
Likes
2
Location
Highett
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory,Chelsea
#24
Originally posted by otaku
im not the one who comes up with rediculous statements, with no evidence to back em up, and then gets all huffy when laughed at :D

dont ever leave Frodo, you are well worth a guffaw or two
and pity
 

demon_dave

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 5, 2003
Posts
2,727
Likes
2
Location
Highett
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory,Chelsea
#25
Originally posted by Frodo
Okay, it may be semantics, but I do attack religions because they are all vile. So I am a vilificator (if that's a word). That's behind my defensive reply. I don't blame applebum for protecting his site but if you feel that religion and those that post based upon evil religious beliefs are not worthy of vilification, then I believe that such vilification is in the interest of not only Australia but the world. That such should be deemed illegal is crud, but that such should result from a website in individual legal action is absurd.
Vilification of a religion is reasonable, vilification of a person based upon his/her beliefs is not IMO. However, this forum is not mine and basically any insult goes.
so everyone's god is evil apart from yours?
 
Top Bottom