Topic

freedom of speech

31 petitions

Started 2 weeks ago

Petition to The sensible folk of the UK

When will we have a HETEROSEXUAL PRIDE march?

Make no mistake. There should be equal rights for all. No hate, no discrimination, no intimidation. "Live and let live" - as long as somebody else's beliefs aren't forced down your throat, as long as that somebody else's actions and behaviour don't encroach upon other people and unwelcomingly disturb their way of life. We can live equally, side by side, showing each other respect and acting with dignity. Old fashioned values maybe but they are the ones which work. Values which allow people to live together, harmoniously. But in this country, and elsewhere in the world, in the 21st century, we seem to feel a burning and paramount need to be politically correct. Perhaps it is us attempting to assuage our guilt for past sins i.e. the denigration, humilation, intimidation, restriction, discrimination etc. of and against minority groups - not just LGBTQ but many others - women, jews, muslims, other religions, pakistanis, blacks, the homeless, the handicapped and so many others. We are perpetual apologists. We don't have to be. Why is LGBT a "special case"? It is just a sexual orientation. Why must we indulge in and promote an enormously unequal focus on gay rights and live in a world of perpetual apology? We simply, all of us, straight or LGBT, need to be better than yesterday and live by the values aforementioned. I am a heterosexual. Is that something I need to celebrate? I don't believe so. Do I force the fact down other people's throats? No, I don't. Should I be treated as a "special case"? I don't believe so. And if I shouldn't have to celebrate or be treated as a special case, both of which I see as inappropriate, then why does any other sexual orientation need to celebrate because that is all it is, a sexual orientation. And should I take over the centre of a City to celebrate? No. Celebration should be of events - like birthdays, weddings, anniversaries. Celebration should be of individuals, groups, governments etc. who do great things, who change the world, who change history, who make the world a better place. I don't celebrate the fact that if I have sex, I choose to do so with a woman. I would be laughed at for celebrating and marching about that. And even if I should celebrate then why do the left wing, politically correct, underdog loving "do-gooders" and "luvvies" in government and elsewhere not create, subsidise and promote a HETEROSEXUAL pride movement and march? Is a LGBT march for anything other than self-glorification and publicity? If we can all treat others with respect, dignity and consideration then a pride march is unnecessary and becomes nothing more than a vehicle for self promotion. And will a march change any residual negative attitudes towards LGBT? Of course not. Will it achieve anything other than disruption? How could it? Might it well provoke antipathy? I think it does. I am part of an ethnic community. I am jewish. Rather than just having their rights denied, 6 million of my ancestors were MURDERED. 6 million. Should that afford me special consideration? No. Should I march once a year for that or for being jewish? No. Should people learn from the horror? Of course they should. That's by way of education and awareness, not by way of a march. Should I lead a decent, considerate life, considerate of others? Yes. Should others do the same? Yes. And that is all that is required.  How is there equality - which the Gay Rights Movement (rightly) seeks - in an exclusive focus on and promotion of one section of society? A focus on them. But no, we have to continue to pander, placing LGBT in a god-like, unassailable position of "specialness". Why? Moreover, why do sections of the LGBT community, who attend pride marches, feel the need to shock and disgust, the need to be lewd, the need to be exhibitionist, the need to cause disruption and nuisance and why does such behaviour appear to be condoned and not acted on by the authorities? It's because the authorities create a politically correct "exception" for a "special group" which doesn't apply to the rest of us. We continue to tolerate behaviour which sits at odds with the common values I suggest we should live by and no such behaviour is ever tolerated of heterosexual people. That's not LGBT equality, that's LGBT "special case". Why? Should I ask a policeman not to arrest me when I'm drunk and half naked "because I am a heterosexual"? Why does such an exemption appear to apply to LGBT? 3 years ago, my wife and I went to Berlin, as tourists. There we were, minding our own business, wandering the central shopping streets of the City when we were suddenly and unexpectedly confronted with a gay pride march. But this was no peaceful march, no peaceful celebration. The roads and therefore our rightful passage were blocked. There was an endless line of open top party buses playing music at an ear splitting level. So loud that you couldn't even talk to each other inside the surrounding shops? Many of the participants were drunk, they were intimidating but worst of all, there were many who were half naked with their genitals on full display - in a major shopping area of a major City in front of men, women and young children. Why did they have this "right"? Would I parade in this way? Of course not. I've seen silent protests where the protesters stand, hold banners and maintain complete silence. That is effective, dignified, stoical and poignant. It gets the point across in striking fashion. Why instead do LGBT pride marches have to descend into a ritual of noise, nuisance and vulgarity? What point does that make, other than those involved demeaning themselves and reducing their reputation to that of drunken revellers and football hooligans?  Do I really, honestly want a heterosexual pride movement and march? Of course I don't but the point is made and it's about time we also stood up for OUR rights.

David Leslie
23 supporters
Started 2 months ago

Petition to Chris Daniels, Mark Zuckerberg, Pavel Durov, Moxie Marlinspike, Ma Huateng

Open letter to messaging apps urging platform changes to protect users

As active users of your on-line messaging services, and also as members of the global multi-stakeholder community around Information and Communication Technologies, we are writing to express our concern regarding the handling of group messages by your services – specifically, the ability of any user with administrator rights to add any other user to a group without the latter’s express permission. In the absence of a mechanism to prevent themselves from being added to groups that they would not like to participate in, users have no option but to manually exit the groups. This is a troubling state of affairs because users may be forcefully exposed to a range of subjectively undesirable content that they would never have signed up for otherwise, which can be particularly damaging, especially in situations where malicious actors attempt to intimidate, disparage, harass or harm individuals in any way. For instance, journalists and reporters writing/speaking about controversial topics like political misconduct often face constant harassment from those who seek to subdue criticism. On the Internet, organized troll-groups (and independent trolls) make concerted efforts to prevent engagement on such topics by any means necessary. This frequently involves attacking the journalists/reporters with content (like highly derogatory remarks and false statements) that is designed to break spirits and discredit work. In India, prominent journalists and reporters like Ravish Kumar, Arnab Goswami, Rana Ayyub, and Karuna John among many others have expressed that they face crippling levels of on-line hate and harassment on a regular basis. The problem is equally relevant for non-public-personalities as well, especially those belonging to minority and otherwise vulnerable groups. A significant number of women report having been harassed on-line at some point in their lives, and cyber-bullying against children is on the rise. Members of ethnic/religious minorities are routinely attacked on-line, as is anyone holding what is perceived to be “unpopular” opinions. While blocking malicious actors can usually help mitigate the damage to an extent, on on-line messaging services like yours, they are able to easily circumvent blocks by creating groups and adding their targets to these groups. The problem is only made worse from there as personal information like phone numbers, user IDs and photographs are shared with a large number of users, which opens the doors to even greater abuse. Considering that the Internet is believed to be an important enabler of free speech and open discourse, it is highly unfortunate that a design flaw with group messages is undermining this role of the Internet in a big way. Your services also a violate individual privacy as personal information is shared amongst group members without consent. In addition, they fail to observe the “privacy by design” principle - “privacy as default setting” in particular – as they do not provide adequate safeguards to prevent infringement of user rights. We therefore urge you to take immediate steps to address this issue, and implement measures to make it so that being added to group conversations without permission is no longer a possibility. Not only will this greatly help in limiting abusive uses of your services, but it will also make users less wary of using the services, making the Internet a safer space for us all. We hope you treat this matter with utmost urgency and take corrective measures at the earliest. Sincerely, Software Freedom Law Centre, India Digital Empowerment Foundation Centre for Internet and Society Society for Knowledge Commons Prof. Rahul De, Hewlett-Packard Chair Professor in ICT for Sustainable Economic Development, IIM Bangalore Faisal Farooqui, CEO, Mouthshut.com Geeta Seshu, Independent Journalist Hartosh Singh Bal, Political Editor, The Caravan Magazine

Software Freedom Law Centre
20 supporters
Started 2 months ago

Petition to Theresa May MP, Jeremy Corbyn MP, david gauke, John Cater

Stop UK University Illegally Banning Free Speech

Whilst we are eventually leaving Europe, we still have freedom of expression rights - not just under the Human Rights Act 1998 (article 10) but also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (article 19). Yet, in a move that even prevents people publicly complaining about homophobic bullying, Edge Hill University is illegally restricting this, in breach of the Education (No. 2) Act 1986 with the following clause in its Student Code of Behaviour: 'A student must not intentionally or recklessly use the name of the University or any of its members in oral, written or electronic form (including social networking sites, fora and blogs) in such a way that either by content or expression it brings the good name of the University into disrepute.' This clause has already been used against students who exercised their legal right to freedom of expression, in order to prevent them making complaints about the University. It is a 'chilling effect' clause and needs to be removed. Instead, it is being used to punish students who complain. It is an illegal way to prevent any kind of criticism of the University. The clause must be removed and students apologised to, particularly as the wording of the clause prevents students publicly complaining about harassment (even sexual harassment). Someone could be subjected to bullying (e.g. homophobic bullying), and then if they're not taken seriously by the University, they're punished if they make their story public!

PJ Croad
73 supporters
Started 2 months ago

Petition to Governor Mike Sonko, President Uhuru Kenyatta, KENYA FILM COMMISION BOARD, Ezekiel Mutua

GIVE KENYAN CREATIVES A CHANCE

How do you require tonnes of young people without stable and proper earnings to be able to afford the new Kenya Film Classification Board (KFCB) rates? Not forgetting that unemployment is an unresolved issue in Kenya.  Youtube is a free platform where anyone can post a video or vlog and it does not pay the owner of the video content, therefore the users agree to terms and conditions and any form of content uploaded is viewed by the youtube officials, therefore the KFCB claim of charging and having mandatory licenses for posting on youtube is vague and a show of disregard of Kenyan youth creative content.  HERE IS A BREAKDOWN OF THE KFCB YOUTUBE/VLOGGING FEES, Vloggers/Kenyan youtubers to pay an annual fee of Ksh 12,000 ($120) for registering and licensing film agents, local and international filmmakers. Pay Ksh 5000 ($50) license fee every week you upload a video on youtube. Payment of ksh 1000 ($10) every day that they film The videos or content to be uploaded has to be approved by the KFCB before being uploaded. A fine of ksh 100,000 to be paid if found vlogging with no license. This is a clear indication of disregard of Kenyan talent and freedom of expression within the country. why are we being charged to post content on a platform that is free? This is the first we have heard of people paying to upload videos on an internationally recognized and free platform (Youtube). We are not to be led like sheep, we have our voices and it is time to raise them! As the youth of Kenya we cannot allow bigotry from these people who disregard Kenyan talent. Their time is up. It is our time to rise, shine and let our voices be heard. They cannot disregard our local content and praise international content that portrays our nation when we can do it ourselves. These are the double standards that are making us as a nation lag behind. Dear Mr. Ezekiel Mutua We as a young nation will not let you dictate our freedom of expression! We are here to stay!! signed, The Kenyan youth.      

Suhail Omar
48 supporters