this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2026
102 points (99.0% liked)

Australia

4828 readers
182 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Laws to be introduced this week include up to two years in prison for distributing, displaying or reciting prohibited phrases to harass or offend

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fizzle@quokk.au 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

The history of harassment, Palestine, and israel is largely irrelevant.

If a law prescribes (proscribes?) specific phrases regadless of intent and context, they should be chosen very, very carefully.

Im not an expert, but i think other states require a context like "intended to incite hatred".

By prescribing this particular phrase, even if you are correct, it allows harassment to portray Palestine as ignored and persecuted - the very intention of terrorism.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz -1 points 18 hours ago

Should people be allowed to use nazi slogans at protests? What about racist slogans?

I understand it's dicey to draw a line somewhere, but do you really believe hate speech should be protected as political speech? It's a slippery slope either way, the trick is to find the point of balance.

And repeating a phrase which initial intent is to call for the eradication of an entire ethnic group is, in my opinion, on the side of the line that should be considered hate speech, promoting violence, and shouldn't be protected.

The history of the conflict is indeed relevant. And the proscription of the phrase isn't being done "regardless of intent and context."

(By the way, 'proscribe' means to condemn something; 'prescribe' means doctor's orders)

I'm not following the logic of your last paragraph.