There is a deeply concerning radical element in our society that is changing the fabric of our culture into an intolerant, ignorant, self righteous and dangerously divided set of communities. More than ever now I am hearing of families being split apart with sad consequences of serious loss of connection. It appears to be driven politically for some odd reason. My own daughter is a victim of this brainwashing and she is in her mid fifties. She supported the protests of the Posie Parker rally and was part of the contingent in Wellington waiting for her arrival. She was delighted that her “group” had driven her away. I know of others who have had similar experiences regarding racial issues and? they are government bureaucrats, as my daughter is. I am not allowed to EVER contact her in any way again and all I have done is defend the freedom to speak.

There is a difference between hatred and offensiveness. If one is offended one can walk away but hate infers danger to life or limb i.e. a threat such as “I will kill/hurt you”. If this is a reportable crime it must be investigated but reporting offence is daft. However, the law must be very clear to be effective and fair. It is interesting that my daughter can wipe me from her life because I don’t agree with her but she can support people she believes are harmed by speech. Hypocritical nonsense. This, believe me, is now becoming a sadly common experience of folk of my age. This needs to be a factor for consideration in guiding this country into a decent, inclusive, democratic society.

Hate is too subjective to be considered in law.

“Hate Crime” laws will make us LESS SAFE.

They will give bad actors claiming to represent the State and others a dangerous power to ABUSE.

Hate speech laws/hate crimes would have a chilling effect on public debate. In particular the reintroduction of de facto blasphemy laws would mean being unable to fully debate religious ideologies, including those wishing to force their rules of behaviour on all of society. We should not be restricting rights of free expression in any way, threats of or direct incitement to violence excepted.

We can decide for ourselves what constitutes hate. The law should be applied evenly without subjective terms such us “hate” being decided arbitrarily.

Who determines what is hate, and what isn’t? Totally subjective depending on point of view and perhaps political motives. Plenty of proof already in Scotland and the UK.

There are 2 sides to every statement.

Taking things personally is one of the hardest things not to do, especially when feelings, insecurity and victim/martyrdom are the norm for stressed people or people suffering overload, mental problems, depression and just overload

No rule for one ,different for another