Equality Justice Video

The Kitchen Table 16 – What’s the Point of the Law?

On a day when I’ve just heard that the Scottish Parliament has passed Humza Yousaf’s new blasphemy law (hate crime bill) the questions of  what is the law? – what is it for?  on what is it based? is so important.  In this weeks Kitchen Table we look at this video from the Law Society of New South Wales.

This is an absolutely vital issue – this morning I came from City Legal and next week I will be speaking in Canberra at another lawyers meeting – If you know of any lawyers, politicians, civil servants, educators or clergy in the area feel free to invite them.  They can sign up here – to either attend personally or come online…

Judge Not: When Dissenters Become Dictators

Religion in Scots Law and Education

The Kitchen Table 15 – The Ethics of a Vaccine

 

7 comments

  1. What you have discussed resonates with me in the belief that the law is inherent and human rights being self – evident but of course we speak from a particular context and I would affirm what you say David in the need for wisdom to apply rules.

    In the light of the hate crime bill in Scotland I would naturally be inclined to baulk at the idea of “hate” being what people I don’t want to define what hate is calling the shots on it and it restricting freedom, say, for what comedians can do. On the other hand as a dyslexic I’ve known it personally work well for me for there to be a definition of a “disability hate incident” and to know I have legal protection form that.

    It’s a dyslexic mantra that sicks and stones may break my bones but it’s words that really hurt me.

    So I find myself in two minds about this hate crime legislation.

    At the same time to whatever extent the bill is good or bad it can be used just as the apostle Paul used his rights as a Roman citizen to demand an audience with the Roman Emperor and then preach to him when he was accused of his learning making him mad!

    All things work for good for those that love God and are called according to his purposes?

  2. Very interesting take on on the so-called ‘Law’ from David and Steve…

    Hope your talk in Canberra next week goes well David, and that those in attendance will receive some good wisdom…

    I have scratched my head all too often, and torn my hair out (and I can’t afford to do that, since am follically challenged..!) at the ‘ So called Law’

    Very simply, and having spoken to leading procurator fiscals and sheriffs (equivalent of government’s prosecution service, and those who decide outcome of the law case, like a judge…) the law is mostly, if I can utilise the phrase… a ‘Donkey’s Derriere’ …

    According to Pareto Law, which tends to hold out in most areas of life, it (The Law…) is 80% guff & wrong, and only 20% reasonable and right…

    It has been twisted beyond all reasonable doubt, by means of obfuscation and blindness.

    David makes the point that the wealthiest in society get the very best results from the courts, and of course that is true, since they can afford the very best lawyers..! It is never a level playing field, in terms of everyone being ‘equal’ under the law ..!

    Take the case of a former first minister in Scotland…Mr Alex Salmond affords the very best lawyers in the land to fight a case and also pursue a case in law… the average or median citizen simply cannot afford that, so wealth or access to wealth, usually wins through..!

    Let’s return to Pareto Law, Rules or Analysis.., the 80-20 law….In my limited experience of dealing with lawyers, perhaps more than 25 different firms and individuals over the years, for various areas and expertise, including corporate, commercial, personal, litigation, defamation (Libel or Slander elsewhere…), mediation, dispute resolution etc etc only 5 out of 25 lawyers/ firms were actually reasonable, helpful and not self serving. The vast majority of lawyers/ solicitors are simply out for themselves, to make as much money for themselves and their firms (for which they will be ‘under pressure’ to do so…) and at any cost and do not care about ‘The Truth’ and what is Fundamentally Right…

    The ‘Law’ is bent, twisted, turned, obfuscated, and denied in order to protect or profit the ‘Client’ whom are paying the usually over priced and exhorbitant fees that the Locusts, sorry lawyers get away with charging….

    I could bang on and on about this subject matter, and how far the law has moved away from Proverbs 8, since ‘Wisdom’ and simple Common Sense has been removed from law, statutes, bills, bye-laws and rules.., hence the secular society in which we live will continue to change the law, for the worst, and away from what God originally intended it to be…!

    I’ll finish with a few words from a song by ‘The Clash’ many years ago, typifying someone without resources taking on the Law….
    ‘I Fought the Law.., and the Law won..’

  3. Utterly disgusting!

    On the face of it, Yousaf being a Muslim, it would seem he has a firmly entrenched vested interest – his religion.
    Of course, all things done in the name of his religion ( Twin Towers -9/11 seems appropiate at this time ) not withstanding, my comment could also be described as a form of ”hate speech” .

    When I lived in the UK curry was sometimes jokingly referred to a the National Dish of England. I prefered Chinese to be honest. As i enjoy both, I am thankful gods were not mentioned in either cuisine.
    However, maybe one day in the not too distant future similar jokes will be made about the Qu’ran being the book upon which Scottish Law is based?

    If I were you, David, I’d stay in Australia.

    As my mother (who lives in England) is occasionally wont to tell me: ” Son, you wouldn’t recognise the place.”

      1. What you state in your article, and then repeat in your reply to Jon Bergen, is false.
        The bill has NOT passed Stage 1. It is still IN Stage 1, as the official link in Jon Bergen’s comment confirms.
        Conservatives proposed a motion to remove the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill and draft new legislation. In the past week, this motion was voted down, and instead MSPs voted (by 31 to 30) for an amendment to improve the Bill, as part of the normal parliamentary process.
        Before the Bill can pass Stage 1, it has yet to be debated, the written submissions will be considered, and any amendments made, before a vote in Parliament (“by 18 December 2020” as stated on the Government website).

Leave a Reply to Gordon Gray Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: