1/ @HumzaYousaf with the greatest respect can I suggest that you watch the movie ‘The Lives of Others’ about the East German government's surveillance of a writer suspected of ‘wrong think’. #HateCrimeBill

2/ If you do you might get an appreciation of how uncomfortable many people are with the hate crime bill as it's being presented.

As it is being presented at the moment it would be more accurately called ‘The Government Approved Thought & Speech Bill’.

3/ It’s an incredibly dangerous step for any government to take when it decides to legislate what is and isn’t acceptable opinions or topics for discussion. Regardless of the the motives for doing so.

4/ I say this as a passionate believer in freedom of speech. That means I defend my right and the rights of others to hear opinions I disagree with or even find offensive.

5/ I would much prefer the opportunity to challenge those views with argument and persuasion, rather than rely on the law to suppress them to begin with.

6/ To be clear, there is a marked difference between speech motivated by hate and views that might hurt someone’s feelings. If you try and legislate to prevent people being emotionally hurt it will fail.

7/ Emotional hurt is a meaningless standard that can never be proved or refuted, only ever alleged by the complainer which opens the door to frivolous and potentially vexatious litigation. Wasting the time of the courts and the Police.

8/ So when you deem certain groups as protected from what popular thinking of the time considers ‘hate’ you are by extension giving tacit approval to continue to abuse other groups that don't don’t have the same status in law. i.e. Women from misogyny.

9/ Instead of singling out groups for special protection, why not introduce a legal test of ‘’aggravated’ to establish whether a reported incident meets the criteria of being motivated by hatred. In my opinion that strike the right balance.

10/ What’s being proposed at the moment would see potential criminal convictions for merely quoting scientific fact if was against the wrong group i.e. one singled out for special treatment.

11/ It's unworkable, open to abuse and fails in its aims, even if those aims are laudable.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.