On 18C

Les Heimann writes: Re. “Rundle: why the Right won’t ever win the 18C debate” (yesterday). The opponents of 18C/D make the point that there exists legal redress for claims of harm covered by the matters raised in 18C/D. Yes I agree: if those “wrongs” are physically visited upon one.

Why then is it acceptable for the same “wrongs”, when only written or uttered to be free of legal redress The existence of 18C/D, together with other legal avenues is to ensure protection for potential victims from all forms of harm from the same source – whether delivered, suggested or threatened.

The laws we have in this respect are logical and fair. Let’s see how they stack up come the debate on marriage equality.

Peter Fray

Fetch your first 12 weeks for $12

What a year. Here at Crikey, we saw a mighty surge in subscribers throughout 2020. Your support has been nothing short of amazing — we couldn’t have got through this year like no other without you, our readers.

If you haven’t joined us yet, fetch your first 12 weeks for $12 and start 2021 with the journalism you need to navigate whatever lies ahead.

Peter Fray
Editor-in-chief of Crikey