Im in favor of hate speech

I don't know exactly what she is being charged with but you can learn about the categories of public order offences here: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/public_order_offences/

As an example:

This is how her behaviour can be charged as a public order offence without her having to have threatened anyone. Notice that at no point is the offence in question dealing with the content of her views or outlawing her from expressing those views in a way that does not cause this kind of offence.

 

The price of freedom of speech is that views and opinions that differ from our own have a right to be heard. This philosophy seems based on an understanding that some self-control is employed in the message, Passion Yes, by all means, Incitement however, (?)
The right for free speech is something that many take for granted and ignore their audiences right to disagree.
Rules based on a moral code that differs for Country to Country, State to State down to Social environment and the company we keep can be; generally speaking, subject to circumstances.
Tolerance and consideration has to go hand in hand with honesty and conviction for communication to be understood - after all how soon it is forgotten that it is the message not the messenger that can be under scrutiny.
Whilst it is true that the sensitivity of others can be over judged and at times an opportunity for some to take a moral high ground over those less eloquent, a degree of restraint I feel must be held in mind.
I just with people would sometimes remember "Sticks and Stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" - (a phrase where taking ownership of one’s reaction is key and not letting it get to you, to be so hurtful)
It is the actions that define us and our character that will see us past the text if those we feel are ignorant.
I just wish people would get along
MeThinks

 

if you think shes not being targeted because of the content of her views your on another planet, you had government ministers twittering we have to find this women shes had god knows how many million death threats if she was sitting down and ranting about something else she would be ignored .

The law is so broad pretty much any public utterance could be covered, and its just down to the political bias of the system who they enforce it on

And I would question why we have to just get along, if someones unhappy about something why cant they tell people

 

They very clearly can.

 

And then get arrested and have death threats.

preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin, you may not agree with him but thats his opinion and I would argue stopping him saying so is stopping his freedom of religion, because it is a sin in traditional Christianity and Judaism and Islam

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...rested-for-saying-homosexuality-is-a-sin.html

Personally If I was him I'd keep on saying what I believe and to hell with worrying about going to jail, hes as free in jail as out of jail .

The country's gone ropey

 

Absolute nonsense, that man was accused of using "abusive or insulting language" to a passer-by, not for the content of his opinion, such a charge would not in any way affect his right to hold that opinion or express that opinion. He is perfectly free to hold and express that opinion in any way that does not cause a public order offence.

Holding any opinion you like, expressing any opinion you like = perfectly fine.
Abusing, insulting, threatening, causing public disorder = not so good.

Not really a difficult distinction to grasp but you seem to be having trouble with it. Dystopianism is very easy and very lazy, and rather dull.

 

Abusive or insulting language.... how can you state your opinion of something you don't like without saying something some person considers insulting language .

If this was applied across the board it would be one thing, I still would not agree with it but it isn't applied across the board, I very much doubt he would be in jail for saying Christians were stupid believing what they believe .

Would you like to be arrested for saying Christian's are stupid believing in Christ because I think thats just as insulting as saying that homosexuality is a sin

 

Obviously, I won't be. I would be entirely secure in expressing the opinion that Christians are stupid, that homosexuals are perverts - it's fine, it's my absolute right. If I were to hang around street corners yelling at people that they are stupid perverts however, I would expect to be arrested for disturbing public order.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_speech
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_order

What exactly is it about this very simple distinction you are failing to grasp?

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...owner-Stop-showing-Bible-DVDs-arrest-you.html

These people were just playing bible verses inside their own cafe with the sound turned down and they were threatened with arrest, thats not going out in the street and shouting at people .

And even if they were going out in the street calling people perverts I'd support their right to free speech, which we clearly don't have anymore in this country

 

Did you read this beyond the headline? I can't really imagine a milder story. A complaint was made about inflammatory homophobic material being displayed in public which the police investigated under the Public Order Act. They did not take any action against the person. Even the Daily Mail, intending to stir up people like you with such non stories in precisely the way they have, had to add this for balance:

A police spokesman said: ‘At no point did the officer ask the cafe owner to remove any materials or arrest the man and we took a commonsense and objective approach in dealing with the complaint. We believe our response and the action we took was completely proportionate and our officers are always available should the cafe owner want to discuss the matter or need any advice in the future.

‘The Constabulary is respectful of all religious views. However, we do have a responsibility to make sure that material that communities may find deeply offensive or inflammatory is not being displayed in public.

‘No complaint has been received about the conduct of the officer in question and we are satisfied that they performed their duties professionally.’

I think this is brilliant, there was a time when the police would have ignored this kind of complaint precisely because it was the Bible that was being accused of being inflammatory, now it is on equal terms with someone displaying pro-Nazi material. Progress.

I agree. Apart from the fact that you can express any view you like with impunity, we have absolutely no right to free speech. It's political correctness gone mad! :willy_nilly:

 

hate should definitely be outlawed.

 

Freedom of expression is either absolute or it doesn't exist, I see no room for any compromise on this. Of course, there are the immature among us Brits who think it only applies to people they agree with.

 

"The Constabulary is respectful of all religious views. However, we do have a responsibility to make sure that material that communities may find deeply offensive or inflammatory is not being displayed in public."

why should you be stopped from displaying material that some group finds offensive .

and where does that end, lets say the homosexuals stop the Christian's from displaying the bible well pretty much all of what homosexuals do is offensive to Christians Jews and Muslim's, so lets ban gay pride flags, or gay bars or gay parades .

If you don't do that and you have policemen going round arresting people who say they think homosexuality a sin, well your being biased

 

He wasn't.

You don't.

 

Everyone in England needs to know about something called:

Common Purpose.

 

this point is pretty invalid to your arguement about tram lady. an aborigine insulting people on a train saying you're not an real aborigine is completley correct. i don't think any white australians would argue with that and feel that they were an aborginie, however a lot of people on the tram that she was claiming weren't british most probably are by several generations, so this is much more likely to cause offence.

your ideal world seems to be where everyone walks about saying exactly what the hell they want in the name of 'free speech' and to hell with peoples feelings. every action has a reaction and if people are just wondering about spouting hatred, whether it's 'intimidating' or not it's going to get a reaction, hence lithium's post which keep trying to get you to acknowledge the public order offence. free speech is a great thing but just mindlessly spouting that you think homosexuals are the devils work coz that's what you believe is just idiocy and idiocy should not be allowed to prevail.

 

Three men convicted for threatening gay people with hanging
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/20/three-muslims-convicted-gay-hate-leaflets?newsfeed=true