Legal attack for speaking the truth
- Nov 18, 2024
- 2 min read
Our ability to speak the truth has never been under greater attack.
More taxpayer money is being wasted on pathetic complaints that the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission is accepting for investigation.
A complaint that I 'incited hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule' through the below social media activity will soon hit the Tasmanian Magistrate's Court, after the Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decided it does not have jurisdiction as this relates to our implied right to freedom of political communication under the Consitution.
As you'll see, I have done nothing wrong.
They complained about the above post. I saw lots of angry, volatile, and aggressive men, and that's what I described. Here's s tiny snippet of the screaming men in action.
That's right, someone complained about me seeing angry men and describing them as such.
They complained about the above post. Here I'm stating that I have no tolerance for harm to kids, including when it comes to so-called 'gender-affirming care'.
That's right, this person complained about me saying that I do not support harming kids and that kids deserve access to healthcare based on solid evidence. This post is, in part, my position on 'gender-affirming' medicine, which Dr Hilary Cass has described as being founded on "remarkably weak" and "shaky foundations". A letter from members of the RANZCP has said that Dr Cass' report "...reveals there is no clear evidentiary basis for gender affirmation interventions and evidence for puberty suppression and cross-sex hormone treatment is of such poor quality that no foundation exists for clinical decisions and informed consent."
They complained about the above flyer that I didn't even produce. The Australian Christian Lobby made it. I put my name to supporting parents' rights when it comes to their child 'changing' their 'gender' through chemicals and surgery.
Yep, they've complained about me saying parents should have rights when it comes to irreversible medical and surgical procedures for their kids.
A person of male appearance threatened me. Thankfully I have a witness. I saw a man, I described a man. And they complained about it.
Crazy, hey. A person of male appearance threatened me but I'm the one that has the complaint made against them.
I didn't waste police time on this matter. I probably should have, on reflection.
What a massive waste of everyone's time and money.
_edited.png)
The discussion surrounding complaints about differing viewpoints is indeed a complex one. It raises the issue of whether society is prioritizing feelings over free expression, particularly when considering how often complaints arise from mere observations. The Pokies https://login2.me/ can serve as a symbol for the gambling culture intertwined with such debates, illustrating how public sentiment can influence discourse. It's critical to evaluate the consequences of suppressing voices in favor of protecting certain narratives.
The issue of complaints lodged against individuals for expressing their views is increasingly controversial. The author highlights a paradox where their observations of angry individuals result in a complaint against them. This raises important questions about free speech and the implications of Royal Reels https://stevensrentals.com/royal-reels-6-casino/ in today's discourse. Are we suppressing valid opinions under the guise of protecting sentiments? The balance between expression and consequence demands careful reflection.