‘Flagrant Denial Of Human Rights’ (Press, 19 June 1975)
This is a Generative AI summary of this newspaper article. It may contain errors or omissions. Please note that the language in the summary is reflective of the original article and the societal attitudes of the time in which it was written.
Summary: ‘Flagrant Denial Of Human Rights’ (Press, 19 June 1975)
On 19 June 1975, the Canterbury Council for Civil Liberties voiced strong opposition to an amendment to the Crimes Amendment Bill proposed by Dr G. A. Wall. The council characterised the amendment as a severe infringement on fundamental human rights, specifically the rights to free expression and association. Dr Wall's proposed amendment sought to make it an offence to invite individuals under the age of 20 to join organisations that advocate for the normalisation of homosexual behaviour. The council argued that this provision would undermine individuals' rights to form associations based on shared beliefs or ideologies. According to the council, the amendment would violate internationally recognised human rights, including those outlined in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. They noted that the move appeared to reflect Dr Wall's personal beliefs on homosexuality, which were described as a minority viewpoint, and expressed concern that he was attempting to impose these views through public policy. The amendment was seen as posing a substantial threat not only to democratic rights overall but also to the freedoms of opinion leaders, such as educators and researchers. The council warned that the implications of the amendment could stifle academic thought and discourse, ultimately preventing the publication of research findings and hindering the development of open debate. Furthermore, the council highlighted that groups supporting homosexual individuals could face condemnation and operational challenges if the amendment were to be enacted. The overarching message from the Canterbury Council for Civil Liberties was a firm defense of the rights to express opinions and associate freely, stressing that Dr Wall’s proposals would hinder progress and the recognition of diverse perspectives in society.
Important Information
The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact
The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand