Sauron97
TS Member
Free speech has been an interesting topic of late, so I thought I'd share some pretty interesting and controversial stuff...
1)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...calais-detain-uk-ban-enter-visa-a8254116.html
A Canadian national who works as a right wing journalist (known for being a harsh critic of both Islam and socialism) banned from the UK after handing out leaflets saying "Allah is gay" as a social experiment, with her motive being the Vice magazine claiming that Jesus might of been gay and that being more accepted. She and her friends were detained in Calais before the Home office officially banned her from the UK as she was a 'danger to the public' or something along those lines. Lots of views both supporting and opposing her, and apparently a case being made to sue the UK government in response.
2)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43478925
Also, a man literally arrested for making a joke about the Hitler and the Holocaust. Very controversial with almost binary agree or disagree views taken by most of the public.
Now, should we be concerned that our courts are threatening people with prison sentences over their personal subjective viewpoints? It all comes down to the public order act passed in to law in 1986:
My personal viewpoint is that regardless of whether I agree or disagree with someone, they should all be given a voice for the sake of both democracy and living a life free from control and fear of being repressed. And for goodness sake, the Nazi salute situation was a joke, albeit rather an edgy one, but a joke nonetheless, and I wouldn't mind betting there are a numerous members of the Jewish community who agree with this and are probably just as concerned about him facing Jail.
I mean the first and most obvious point surely is that there can't be freedom of speech whilst hate speech laws exist and that freedom must mean freedom regardless of offence caused. The bigger question is where do we draw the line on hate speech and what does the future hold.... or should we not worry about it at all? . Be interested to hear views...
1)
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...calais-detain-uk-ban-enter-visa-a8254116.html
A Canadian national who works as a right wing journalist (known for being a harsh critic of both Islam and socialism) banned from the UK after handing out leaflets saying "Allah is gay" as a social experiment, with her motive being the Vice magazine claiming that Jesus might of been gay and that being more accepted. She and her friends were detained in Calais before the Home office officially banned her from the UK as she was a 'danger to the public' or something along those lines. Lots of views both supporting and opposing her, and apparently a case being made to sue the UK government in response.
2)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-43478925
Also, a man literally arrested for making a joke about the Hitler and the Holocaust. Very controversial with almost binary agree or disagree views taken by most of the public.
Now, should we be concerned that our courts are threatening people with prison sentences over their personal subjective viewpoints? It all comes down to the public order act passed in to law in 1986:
Americans that I've spoken to in particular seem to always bring this kind of stuff up when they mention UK politics, because in their eyes, this law is disgraceful and sets us on the path of '1984'. In ways they aren't wrong, as dictatorships almost always seem to begin with the removal of freedom of expression (Enabling act of 1933 in Germany being the biggest and by far the most extreme example of them all)Hatred against a group of persons by reason of the group's colour, race, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origins. Section 18 of the Act says:
A person who uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, abusive or insulting, is guilty of an offence if—
(a) he intends thereby to stir up racial hatred, or
(b) having regard to all the circumstances racial hatred is likely to be stirred up thereby.
Offences under Part 3 carry a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment or a fine or both.
My personal viewpoint is that regardless of whether I agree or disagree with someone, they should all be given a voice for the sake of both democracy and living a life free from control and fear of being repressed. And for goodness sake, the Nazi salute situation was a joke, albeit rather an edgy one, but a joke nonetheless, and I wouldn't mind betting there are a numerous members of the Jewish community who agree with this and are probably just as concerned about him facing Jail.
I mean the first and most obvious point surely is that there can't be freedom of speech whilst hate speech laws exist and that freedom must mean freedom regardless of offence caused. The bigger question is where do we draw the line on hate speech and what does the future hold.... or should we not worry about it at all? . Be interested to hear views...