...To Think Free Speech is Dead in the UK

[RockyBayEve]

After 3 free speech advocates American Brittany Pettibone, her Austrian boyfriend and Canadian journalist Lauren Southern are detained by UK border force, barred from speaking at Speakers Corner, deported or barred entry.

A finely balanced view there Rooster ...

Well said Radicalrooster.

I think Rooster's post there is pretty accurate.

To slightly repeat myself from earlier, I really do hope that the Trans issue blows up. I hope that Self ID becomes law, I hope the state and the police starts cracking down on women for anti-Trans hate speech. I hope women experience their children turning against them for their "backwards" views on gender as they have their mandatory Trans lessons at school. I hope mothers have their children taken away from them (as has happened in Canada) for trying to discourage gender transitioning.

All sickening stuff. But maybe, just maybe, the penny will then drop for women about what free speech actually means and why it is important. And why you MUST defend the rights of people whose opinions you despise when they want to speak.

A finely balanced view there Rooster

I'm merely balancing out the hysterical narrow-minded consensus that seems to hold those on the left in thrall to the notion that only certain types of opinions should be held, let alone aired.

I'm merely balancing out the hysterical narrow-minded consensus that seems to hold those on the left in thrall to the notion that only certain types of opinions should be held, let alone aired.

Is it any wonder that we have such a crazy amount of polarization in today's society? Not only are we not willing to listen to other opinions, we don't even want those opinions in our country.

Marchin1984, just wanted to say-spot on.

After listening to her talk and what she was planning to do, I'm glad she was banned. Dozy blond shit stirrer.

But on the whole I don't think we should ban people, just give them rope to hang themselves with, and they will.

Marchin she says clearly in the link that they were planning to put up posters in Luton saying, your God Allah is a gay god, and speak to individuals on the street telling them Allah is 'gay' and similar, to compare how the Muslims reacted to Christians.

And that's all I watched, I have no time for her Ilk.

she says clearly in the link that they were planning to put up posters in Luton saying, your God Allah is a gay god, and speak to individuals on the street telling them Allah is 'gay' and similar, to compare how the Muslims reacted to Christians.

So what?

Indeed. I suspect the reaction of a large number of those spoken to would be sobering for a liberal elite that defines the worth of a society by the degree of its tolerance to such matters as homosexuality.

So that's not making any real point, it's just inciting violence so they can say, "see? Look at the nasty Muslims all crazy and all, they don't know how to live in a democracy. "

You are missing the point because you don't understand Islam. To compare God to any human being even Jesus or Muhammad is a huge blasphemy and makes people angry immediately. This isn't about Muslim attitudes to gay rights.

Most Muslims really don't care if someone is gay, just as most Christians don't either.

I believe free speech is an absolute and these people, and everyone else, should be able to to travel freely and share ideas.

Free speech means letting people be wrong. Not preventing them from sharing there ideas.

I would ask you to reconsider using Stefan Molyneux as a source of reasoned opinion. His views on race and IQ are abhorrent.

I believe in free speech too, but I can't help thinking ha! Good! That this troublemaker was packed off sharpish.

Titania - there is no need to "understand Islam" as thankfully we do not have "blasphemy" laws in this country. Neither do we, as a nation that prides itself on its enlightenment values and secular democracy, give a flying fig about what makes religious people "angry".

I suspect your reaction to this story is personal and that you'd very much support blasphemy being added to the statute books.

Yeah, no. You don't know where I'm coming from at all do you?

Why deliberately blaspheme any religion and upset British citizens for no purpose at all? Just to make a snidely point that only your thick as pigs shit racist friends would get anyway? They were deliberately trying to incite violence and show up members of the Islamic community. That is all. There was no greater good or deep point being made. I happen to think that's very wrong.

If you disagree with me and think religious people should accept routine pointless abuse, let's go to the nearest Hindu temple or Jewish synagogue, we can pick abusive comments and make banners. I will stand by and record what happens to you. "The God of the Torah is a Nazi" "Your elephant god sucks...." and so on. Up for it?

So that's not making any real point, it's just inciting violence so they can say, "see? Look at the nasty Muslims all crazy and all, they don't know how to live in a democracy. "

it's not inciting violence. Inciting violence is saying go hurt X person or Y group. There is no violence implied or otherwise.

You are missing the point because you don't understand Islam. To compare God to any human being even Jesus or Muhammad is a huge blasphemy and makes people angry immediately. This isn't about Muslim attitudes to gay rights.

I don't have to understand Islam to know what I think about free speech. Your post suggests to me, in fact, that her presence is entirely valuable here if is shows that simply saying Allah is gay will cause others to be violent.

I could be wrong but I THINK that Lauren S's intentions was not to incite violence on the streets of Luton, but to force people to examine the sticky idea of tolerance. That is, the idea that if we promote tolerance in a society, we must also tolerate those who are intolerant. That, for some, is a tough square to circle. Indeed some of the comments on this post show exactly what I mean. "We promote tolerance as a society, but we must ban these three people because we don't like those particular ideas."

Circle to square I mean!

If you disagree with me and think religious people should accept routine pointless abuse, let's go to the nearest Hindu temple or Jewish synagogue, we can pick abusive comments and make banners. I will stand by and record what happens to you. "The God of the Torah is a Nazi" "Your elephant god sucks...." and so on. Up for it?

if there are people out there who want to make a point about hinduism or judaism, then yes why not? People have made musicals about the mormons and, full credit to the mormons, they ran with it.

Now, people don't have the right to harass others, but handing out leaflets, and talking to people willing to talk is not violence.

Titania - you are advocating for blasphemy laws. Even in this thread, full of people who don't really support free speech, this puts you in a niche category. Questioning religions is not a matter of "upsetting people for no purpose at all". You do not understand the problems of making criticism of religion illegal and you clearly do not have a background understanding of how we managed to get to a secular society in this country. How long that took and the benefits we all enjoy as a result.

It's not something that most people, other than the profoundly religious, are prepared to just throw away.

We're a divided nation blaming each other for when things go wrong. We should rather be looking at what the government is or isn't doing to unite the country.