Abstract
ABSTRACTRecent free speech controversies in Australia have given rise to deep-seated disagreement between protagonists. These protagonists seek to advance rival and conflicting imperatives in such controversies that are centred, respectively, on the defence of “free speech” and the need to limit such speech for the sake of competing ideals. This article seeks to investigate these competing imperatives and their relative priority by focusing on four recent speech controversies in Australia centred upon ANZACs, Anzac Day, same-sex marriage and “eternal damnation”. The article seeks to distinguish the four speech controversies along a number of dimensions, and to determine in which circumstances, and on what grounds, it is possible to prioritise one of these imperatives relative to the other, with the result that conclusions might be reached as to whether free speech, or limits on speech, ought to prevail.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
