On 07/02/2008, Daniel R. Tobias dan@tobias.name wrote:
That's presupposing that the aim of the law should be to suppress everything that anybody might regard as racist, even if entirely unintentional.
Actually no, the aim of the law seemed to be to prevent people from using the *claim* that something was entirely unintentional as an excuse when it couldn't be absolutely proved that it was deliberate, even though it might seem to be highly likely to be the case that a particular action that had the effect of disadvantaging a particular group was taken intentionally.
That's presupposing that "not disadvantaging minorities" is a consideration that trumps everything else, including things that some others might regard as of greater importance such as free speech and free inquiry.
There are usually restrictions on free speech in many countries, including the UK, against 'inciting racial hatred' and so forth, so yes; and I find it difficult to believe that this is wrong.
Which is not to say that I think that these images do that, because I certainly do not.
-- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/