What about the rights of people to be PROTECTED from bigots?

By Pamela Nathan

Re: ‘Brandis, bigotry and balancing free speech’, Comment by Andrew Lynch, published in The Age 26 March 2014

Andrew Lynch reports on the deep hole dug by the Coalition before its proposed changes to the Racial Discrimination Act.

He reports that, a day after the Attorney General stated that “people have a right to be bigots”, George Brandis released his intended changes to the provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act.

Lynch rightfully notes that on Section 18C the government is clearly making a choice about which people have priority rights. He also notes that “The reality is in a democracy some voices are louder than others”.  He notes that issues of race are treacherous business and complicated. He thinks the government has dug its own hole and is trying to shovel a way out and hoping it isn’t digging itself deeper.

I looked up the Oxford dictionary meaning of the word bigot: “violent and unreasonable adherent of a creed or view”.  Does the support of bigotry uphold a safe and supportive environment for all? Is the government really supporting the rights of bigots and bigots themselves, namely the supporters of violent and unreasonable beliefs?