Social Cohesion
Social cohesion is the willingness for a member of society to participate in said society in order to survive and prosper via group cooperation. In law, social cohesion laws are implemented to avoid conflicts and behaviours that may cause group to breakdown. Social cohesion laws generally prohibit negative behaviour in hopes that individuals will choose to act in a positive and non-destructive manner.
As reported by BBC News, Rolf Harris, an established TV personality, has been jailed for five years and nine months for twelve indecent assaults against four girls between 1968 and 1986. One victim was only seven or eight years old, whilst the other three girls were at varying stages of teenage hood. The sentencing Harris received …show more content…
The Border Force Act prevents anyone involved in immigration centres raising concerns about said centres unless they have authorisation from the department of immigration. The maximum sentence for speaking out without the department’s approval is two years. Dr John-Paul Sanggaran, who used to work on Christmas Island, says that it was already very difficult to voice concerns about the camp as those who do could risk losing their job, and that the Border Force Act only increases the pressure to remain silent least they be …show more content…
This law is seen to have more capacity for misuse than it does to be beneficial, and as such should be altered. The main purpose of progressive laws is to bring in new laws which reflect society’s shift in values to aid in the transition from one generation to the next. The huge backlash the government has received since implementing this law indicates that the Border Force Act does not reflect the people’s attitude towards immigration and freedom of information. There have been several protests against the law and groups of lawyers and doctors have begun speaking out about the standard of Australian detention centres in direct opposition to the law. The second aspect of socially progressive laws is to have clear benefits in later years. The Border Force Act has no clear societal benefit apart from providing an ‘ignorance is bliss’ blanket on immigration matters and, as the opposition to the law suggests, is not what society wants. With this law being so disliked and unable to fulfil its two main purposes as a law, it is possible that retracting the law altogether would be an improvement over its existence. That said, an improvement that could be made in this law would be instead of restricting speech, to enable it so that workers can bring issues to the people’s attention, which protests have made
Social cohesion is the willingness for a member of society to participate in said society in order to survive and prosper via group cooperation. In law, social cohesion laws are implemented to avoid conflicts and behaviours that may cause group to breakdown. Social cohesion laws generally prohibit negative behaviour in hopes that individuals will choose to act in a positive and non-destructive manner.
As reported by BBC News, Rolf Harris, an established TV personality, has been jailed for five years and nine months for twelve indecent assaults against four girls between 1968 and 1986. One victim was only seven or eight years old, whilst the other three girls were at varying stages of teenage hood. The sentencing Harris received …show more content…
The Border Force Act prevents anyone involved in immigration centres raising concerns about said centres unless they have authorisation from the department of immigration. The maximum sentence for speaking out without the department’s approval is two years. Dr John-Paul Sanggaran, who used to work on Christmas Island, says that it was already very difficult to voice concerns about the camp as those who do could risk losing their job, and that the Border Force Act only increases the pressure to remain silent least they be …show more content…
This law is seen to have more capacity for misuse than it does to be beneficial, and as such should be altered. The main purpose of progressive laws is to bring in new laws which reflect society’s shift in values to aid in the transition from one generation to the next. The huge backlash the government has received since implementing this law indicates that the Border Force Act does not reflect the people’s attitude towards immigration and freedom of information. There have been several protests against the law and groups of lawyers and doctors have begun speaking out about the standard of Australian detention centres in direct opposition to the law. The second aspect of socially progressive laws is to have clear benefits in later years. The Border Force Act has no clear societal benefit apart from providing an ‘ignorance is bliss’ blanket on immigration matters and, as the opposition to the law suggests, is not what society wants. With this law being so disliked and unable to fulfil its two main purposes as a law, it is possible that retracting the law altogether would be an improvement over its existence. That said, an improvement that could be made in this law would be instead of restricting speech, to enable it so that workers can bring issues to the people’s attention, which protests have made