Warp wrote:
> John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>> Furthermore, this law will be selectively enforced.  The history of 
>> restrictions on free speech give no example of such a law that was 
>> uniformly enforced whether A slandered B or B slandered A; the 
>> government has always taken sides, acting on one group's complaints no 
>> matter how ludicrous they were, and turning a deaf ear to the grievances 
>> of the other.
> 
>   There was a clear case of this rather recently in Sweden (surprise).
> 
>   Sweden's law has this section which criminalizes slander against groups
> of people based on their ethnicity, nationality, religion, gender, etc.
> 
>   Well, not long ago an extreme feminist wrote a heated article in a
> newspaper using almost all possible forms of slander against Swedish men
> (basically she wrote that Swedish men are in all ways inferior to immigrant
> men, and used all kinds of insulting words against Swedish men).
> 
>   The question was raised whether this broke the law regarding slander
> against a group, in this case based on nationality, ethnicity and gender.
> An official statement was made that this was *not* a case criminalized
> by the law (even though the law has absolutely no mention of such an
> exception).
> 
>   The fact that the law is not the same for all people regardless of gender,
> nationality and ethnicity got de jure status.
> 
In general if you insult the ruling class that is in general not 
considered slander. Nor if you insult the group you belong to. You might 
not like that, but that does not make it wrong. ;)

Post a reply to this message