Parliament yesterday passed the Socialist Party’s proposal based on which inflammatory speech will be punishable by up to two years imprisonment.
The proposal submitted by Socialist MPs Dezső Avarkeszi and Balázs Csákabonyi states: “Those who, before the general public, use or propagate an expression related to the Hungarian nation or certain groups within it, particularly national, ethnic, racial, or religious groups, that may curtail the integrity of the members of the group in question, or offend their human dignity, commit a misdemeanour.” An exception to the rule is when an expression applies to public figures.
Neither the opposition nor the Free Democrats supported the proposal but the proposal was passed by the House, due to the early departure of Fidesz MPs.
Could some one explain for a simple layman what it means when “the proposal was passed by the House, due to the early departure of Fidesz MPs.”?
How idiotic!! Free speech should be free speech. Language is the only thing that avoids violence. Or do the lawmakers – the powers that be – hope that things get violent so that can make cheep political manifestations (“see the opposition or the people, there all fascists, we´re the only ones that guarantee reason i Hungary!”)?
If you don’t like this new law about speech why not go and thank all those Nazi lovers, Jew haters, ect.It would seem to me that the objective of everyone would be to try to help make Hungary strong, unified, and healthy so that the people within could prosper. Not these guys with the big mouths. They prey on the weak, the unhappy, and the guliable to put forth an unrealistic path to further destruction. They do need to be stopped or at the very least checked and kept in control.
apparently a good chuck of Fidesz was not in da House at the time of the voting, so the bill was pushed through by MSZP alone. 174 ayes vs 127 nays (with 31 coming from SZDSZ and the Christian Dems). MDF abstained
So should we regard this as tactical manoeuvring from Fidesz side (= getting the law through without officially supporting it), or it just shows their disrespect for Parliamentarian work?
New laws are not introduced 5 minutes before the vote, they probably knew that this specific proposal would be voted on for several weeks.
elayne: Well, I´ve heard this kind of lingo before, the communist. A democracy, a real democracy should be defined by what it allows that it doesn´t like to hear.
Tolerance is not about allowing what we like to hear (as a liberal), that you are gay, black, jew, but the opposite. Either you use tolerance as a substantial concept or you shouldn´t use it at all. That´s democracy: to accept all that we (as moral and liberal individuals) don´t accept.
Rofa – Do you have any good example on a Country where the democracy you are describing works?
Well, the UK and the US for a start. “I may not agree with what you
say, but I would fight to the death for your right to say it”.
Viking – you seem to be under the illusion that because other
countries aren’t perfect, it’s OK for Hungary to be shit because
everywhere else is just as bad. But this just ain’t so, and it’s a damn
poor excuse for anything.
…and don’t confuse democracy with free speech – the two things
are the same, though you can’t have democracy without free
speech.
What we have here is elected dictatorship, not democracy.
aemann – Have you tried to say the word “BOMB” in an US/UK airport lately? Obviously there are limits to “free speech” and so must it be in a society to work. Hungary is one of the countries you can insult people very cheap, because of everyone is inexperienced with what “free speech” is. It is seen as it cannot be any limits on anything.
I do not, in difference to you, believe Hungary is shit.
Nice to see that you agree with Kosa about “elected dictatorship” = No elections 2010. We will see.
And the prize for this weeks utterly fatuous and childish argument
goes to Comrade Viking. Really, can you do no better than that?
Define “offend human dignity”, or “curtail the integrity of…” or even
“expression related to the Hungarian nation or groups within it”.
Where is this – Turkey? The EU have just ordered Turkey to rewrite
their constitution to remove the crime of “anti-Turkishness”. This is
a bad law, badly drawn, and will be used to suppress dissent.
Perhaps you’re happy with that?
aemann – Well that happens when one goes down to your level of arguments. Sad I won this week, snatching it from you?
Nice to see you actually quote some facts(?). I have not read the law in English, so I have not been able to decide if I am for it or against it. I just tried to understand Rofa’s post.
Maybe you can recommend your English source?
Personally I am for “Free Speech”, but I never saw a country where it exists. There are always limits, so let’s discuss them.