Wednesday, June 29, 2022

Mike Hosking: Free speech must be protected, even if you don't agree with what is being said

For me, the more interesting aspect of our Roe v Wade reaction is the intolerance of so many in a country that would argue the opposite.

We love free speech, we love freedom of thought, and we love our ‘rights’, all of our ‘rights’, until of course it affects us or affronts us.

Then we go nuts.

I got a lot of reaction to the Simon O’Connor post on Roe v Wade, National had just lost half their votes was a theme.

The attacks on Christopher Luxon were another.

Such an extreme reaction to something that has literally no impact in this country whatsoever.

We took the actions of the court of another country and somehow transferred them to our place and started hypothesising as to what would happen if something similar were to unfold here, even though it wasn’t going to.

People like Lorde stood on a stage at Glastonbury and said “F the Supreme Court” as if f’ ing them is an achievable thing.

At least Billie Joe Armstrong of Green Day in renouncing his American citizenship is in fact an American and therefore is a great deal more closely tied to the United States Supreme Court than we are.

Simon O’Connor’s view is not my view, but I like the fact he is allowed to have it.

I’m not at all convinced that Luxon making him take the post down did himself or his party any sort of service.

On a conscience issue, why are you closing down a conscience because it doesn’t align with your parties policy? Do all MPs have to line up lock step on everything their party says?

And if they do, how out of wack with the real world is that?

But Luxon, who is pro-life, and more than welcome to be, then gets second-guessed by Grant Robertson for purely political purposes.

Once again, seemingly suggesting that you can’t have a separate personal view to party policy.

If the Nats aren’t changing abortion law, if no one is changing abortion law 1) Why don’t we believe the people who say it and 2) What a waste of an exercise arguing about something that isn’t happening.

As for losing half the votes, that’s the sort of emotive tosh far too may intolerants rely on to bully people.

Historically, single issues don’t swing votes, so threatening it is pointless.

If anything has been learned out of these three or four days of overreaction, it’s that we are ideological frauds.

Big supporters of free speech, unless that free speech doesn’t suit us.

Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings


Anonymous said...

"Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free speech, and desire for novelty." - Pope Gregory XVI

DeeM said...

Why don't they just hold a referendum on it, state by state if they want. Then the majority view will rule, just like it's meant to in any democracy....but most certainly IS NOT in little old New Zealand.

Why have a tiny group of judges decide when they can't even agree any better than the public. This is about an opinion, not a matter of law.
You can't please all the people all of the time so the majority should decide.

Anonymous said...

i understand that mr o'connor posted that tweet from a personal account, not a national party account. i don't think mr luxon should have intervened at all - if asked, he should have said - that's an mp's personal opinion, not a party position.
i understand that the subject is the epitome of 'grey area', but it is better to debate the silence than to silence the debate...