Does the HRC support free speech?


Based on their past actions I do not believe that the New Zealand Human Rights Commission will support free speech for all New Zealanders. They have shown themselves to be focussed instead on silencing and punishing the majority for daring to hurt the feelings of their favourite victimhood groups.

The Human Rights Commission appear to hold a left-wing worldview that robust discussion is hate speech and that hate speech or ‘disharmonious’ speech should be criminalised.

They are not even clever about hiding their agenda. They may claim that we need hate speech or disharmonious speech laws to protect everyone from racist abuse but they are agitating to create laws that specifically protect a set of ideas incompatible with western values: Islam. They are the HUMAN Rights Commission, not the Ideas Rights Commission! Ideas do not have rights and Islam is a horrible set of ideas.

People have rights. Ideas don’t have rights.

The Human Rights Commission want to protect the hurt feelings of a group of people who have no desire to assimilate or integrate into our free western democracy here in New Zealand. They want to impose their barbaric and backward Islamic blasphemy laws on us to stop us criticising the bad ideas of their religion.

We know from looking at the mess in the United Kingdom that once they pull that off they will then push for sharia law courts to operate outside of New Zealand’s legal system. They have achieved this in the United Kingdom already with many sharia law courts operating and making rulings that take away British Muslim women’s equal rights. If we don’t push back hard now we will be facing the same terrible issues the United Kingdom is facing in two or so decades time.

So what are the past actions of our Human Rights Commission that makes me so sure they will not take the side of the Free Speech Coalition’s battle against anti-free speech politician Auckland Mayor Phil Goff?

  1. Ex-head of the Human Rights Commission Susan Devoy claimed that using the word Christmas was not inclusive and shouldn’t be used around migrants.
  2. She also pushed for crimes to be labelled and recorded as hate crimes with an agenda for special hate laws to be created.
  3. The Human Rights Commission promoted strengthening not removing blasphemy laws in New Zealand because they felt that the ideas of Muslims require “special” protection from criticism.
  4. They are pushing for ?disharmonious speech? laws?
  5. They did NOTHING when various New Zealand Muslim imams were exposed for hate speech and inciting genocide against Jews.
  6. They did NOTHING when groups have rallied on Auckland Council property to show their support for Hezbollah, which is a designated terrorist organisation.
  7. They did NOTHING when a disgraced hate-speech Imam was invited to a police dinner.
  8. The Human Rights Commission Submission: Quote from Whaleoil comments:

[…] is a manifesto to pursue the left’s “multicultural project” in ways that kiwis have never agreed to and of which they are largely unaware. It is deeply obnoxious and dangerous “waffle” and completely underhand.

The majority of the submission reads as a ‘pass the buck’ apologist doctrine that simply echoes the views of the current snowflake generation. Is it dangerous if it were to be taken seriously? Of course, it is. And you know as well as I do, that this is where we are headed. End of quote.

The Human Rights Commission cannot be trusted one inch. Like the United Nations, they are not fit for purpose and should be disbanded. Now that Susan Devoy is gone there is a tiny chance that the ideological direction of the commission will change but I would not put money on it.