The word “thought” has been thrown around a lot in this year’s political debate, and it’s a word that has been used to describe a range of opinions and ideas.
We can’t have the word “free thought” be used to prosecute a person for something they might say that is in some way different to the dominant views of the day.
But this is precisely what is happening in Australia.
The new laws will come into effect on January 1, 2018.
They’ll be a significant blow to freedom of speech.
We have laws already in place to protect free speech.
That’s because speech is protected by the Australian constitution, which protects freedom of expression.
That means that anyone who says something that is different from the dominant view of the community, whether it’s in terms of content or the content of their ideas, is in breach of the Australian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
So, it is important to remember that there are some important differences between free speech and hate speech.
In free speech, you are free to express your ideas, to write and publish, to speak on the radio, to organise protests and to protest and organise.
Hate speech is when you commit an offence against someone else’s identity or freedom of opinion, in a way that breaches the person’s rights to be free from discrimination, to be able to speak freely and to practise religion freely.
These are the things that we have said we’re not going to tolerate in free speech laws.
The laws in place will only protect speech that is not offensive, but it will also protect speech about which there is disagreement.
The law is clear that if you’re doing something that incites hatred, it’s hate speech, and hate crimes are criminal offences.
The government is saying we’re going to change the law so that people can be prosecuted for making statements that are not offensive to anyone.
The problem with this is that the law is also vague, so we don’t know what offences people can and cannot be charged with.
This is an absolute failure to protect freedom of thought and expression.
So what does the government want to do?
What it is saying is that it wants to get rid of hate crime laws.
This means the government wants to create a new offence to cover what people call “inciting hatred”.
The bill will make it a crime to incite hatred in a specific way and that will make inciting hatred a criminal offence, too.
It will also make it illegal for someone to incite hate through the use of words, imagery or behaviour that is “unfair, hateful, racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, homophobic-transphobic or any other form of discrimination”.
That will make anyone who is engaged in conduct that is intended to cause someone to feel, or is likely to cause a person to feel something, “engaged in conduct” that is unlawful.
The government has made it clear that they’re not looking to go back to the criminalisation of the offence of inciting hatred as it was in the 1980s.
They’re going for a completely different law.
And they’re doing this because they want to stop free speech being used to silence people, and because they are going to make it much harder for people to speak their minds.
The law has been designed to be broad and to cover a wide range of conduct.
The bill has the word hate crime in its title, but the section of it dealing with inciting hatred will actually have very narrow coverage.
The act would only cover a very narrow category of conduct, the words and actions that “incite hatred” is concerned with.
That would mean that you would have to be a person who has been convicted of a hate crime under the Criminal Code Act 1961, as well as the Crimes Act 1900.
If you’re charged under the new legislation, you will not be able argue that your speech is unlawful or that you are the victim of a criminal act.
The prosecution will then make a determination of whether you are guilty.
This will mean that if the offence is charged as a hate offence, it will be treated as a criminal charge, and if it is charged under section 1.2 of the Criminal Law (Prevention of Discrimination) Act 2000, it can be charged as an aggravated hate crime.
This would mean you would be liable for up to six years in jail.
So the government is not going for the kind of criminalisation that the late Liberal prime minister, Kevin Rudd, and his colleagues had in the 1970s and 1980s, when they used the term “faggot” to describe people who were not white.
It’s not going after people who have a legitimate point of view.
The purpose of the legislation is to make sure that it’s much harder to organise and to speak about controversial issues and controversial political issues.
It is the government’s aim to create the kind in which the police and the courts will be less likely to be interested in prosecuting people for offences that they believe are